You are correct. You do not know what does. You do not know what does are few a few grammar fundamentals as well. Perhaps you might want to do a simple Internet search before ranting online. Here's a quote from the World Health Organization:

The benefits of circumcision that accrue during childhood include a marked reduction in urinary-tract infections, which affect one in 100 uncircumcised boys, mainly during the first two years of life, and inflammation or infection under the foreskin, which affects around 17 in 100 uncircumcised boys before the age of 8. Circumcision reduces the risk of these problems by around 60%. In adulthood, circumcision has been shown to reduce the risk of HIV infection in men by 50% to 60%, and is now recommended by the World Health Organization as an HIV prevention strategy.(Goldman. (2013). Do the Health Benefits of Neonatal Circumcision Outweigh the Risks? wsj.com)

So yeah, not mutilation. Nothing wrong with being uncircumcised of course though I have to say that dealing with SMEGMA as an adult male sounds pretty gross.

Anyone saying that they are completely ripping you off (and OP especially) is full of crap. Not the best service when out of country but it really isn't that bad...you simply feel like they are trying to take you for a bit of a ride...nothing you should be surprised of when dealing with an American company.

Here's my flight path (last week mind you, got home last night): Chicago --> Frankfurt --> Istanbul --> Toronto --> Chicago
I had Internet the whole time with less than 5 minutes of sync-up after arriving in each new country.

The only downsides to TMobile when out of country is that your data plan is slow and they try to get you to spend a silly amount for high speed Internet while in the foreign country. Calls in country are 0 (same as your normal plan) and calls to the US are 20 cents/minute which is silly but not horrible. Internet on phone is mediocre while out of country.

Want to complain about something? Focus upon the crappy airline food and lack of Internet access while on planes. Or better yet, focus upon the crappy people who don't know how to turn off their ringer on a plane. So many other problems in life centering around schmucks that don't appreciate how far we've advanced than rolling across the border with minimal fees. $750 is a bunch of crap...not reflective of actual TMobile customers. The 6 bucks to chat with my sister for 30 min from Istanbul is real though its my fault for not skyping or using facetime.

70-80th percentile on achievement tests on average? Many Home Schooled kids may do very well but I'm just a tad bit doubtful of your numbers. First off, neither resource provided meets the criteria of peer reviewed research. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, you will be hard pressed to find a research study that can accurately assess the number of students that are educated outside of our public and private educational systems. Long story short, if you are going to support your argument with "research" then you had best learn the difference between hippie-granola-jesus-crispie-treats and professional research articles.

Forget the research, ignore all of the imaginary educational progress that society claims to have made over the past few decades. The well educated mommy always knows best!

Nice observations, especially in the marketing scale! I would also add that if the wealthy didn't buy all those disproportionately priced items then no one would be making them, loss of jobs, etc. In some ways it reminds me of art benefactors. The benefactors simply throw a little disposable income away for a moment of pleasure. Not so different from buying a expensive bottle of Champagne at a restaurant, an expensive suit/purse, or other items associated with prestige.

So what about the STEM shortage I keep hearing about? How is it that we can keep pushing for more careers in STEM but at the same time have a surplus? I've read a number of articles that have touched on this topic but would love to hear some of the opposing arguments by individuals with real knowledge on the topic.

Or in other news, superior athletes do not have the brain power to expend! Its a bad joke you anonymous coward! Do we need to plant electrodes to your head to test your genetic gift to interpret social interaction?

Sounds like Captain Obvious has struck again by "proving" a common "truth" that everyone already knew.

Interesting post. I'm especially curious about your observation of individuals doing upwards of 6 post-docs. I used to think that a post-doc was only for recent graduates but your post implies that this is far from reality. Please post a bit more if you have the time or inclination.

And you know this because...

Don't take this badly but I think you have a misconception of what the concept of "language" means...perhaps look into the concept of semiotics? As far as mental dexterity goes, the mind is not a muscle and it does not demonstrate any traits associated with physical activity from a traditional sense. It does not grow stronger or more nimble no matter how much you study or learn. Memorizing a thousand poems will not make your mind sharper or improve your ability to memorize; you improve your ability to memorize by learning memorization, recall, and other study techniques. Foreign language teaches nothing; it is a concept, not an actual being. Saying the word house in English, Spanish, or French does not provide additional worldviews. You increase your stance on worldviews by studying culture, not the language per say.

We don't read poetry, we decode it. Or maybe you would say that we interpret it? Depends upon your point of view. We don't read the original article, we skim it.

The original author is romanticizing the term literature, not that there is anything wrong with that of course, but literature is a term applied to everything from Dostoevsky to instructions for assembling a toy. Beautifully/Dreadfully written code could be labeled as art, poetry, literature, garbage, puzzling, cryptography, and a whole variety of other terms.

With all that being said and putting aside that I do not agree with the original author's definition of literature, I do appreciate their perspective.

Sucx0r = delE7ex0rz

Do I really need any other reason?

This is a geek website, not a "research" website so stop talking a bunch of crap about a bunch of crap. I'm providing silly examples so don't focus upon them. Most researchers suck at stats and my attempt at explaining should either help out or show that I don't know what I'm talking about. Take your pick.

"p=.05" is a stat that reflects the likelihood of rejecting a true null hypothesis. So, lets say that my hypothesis is that "all cats like dogs" and my null hypothesis is "not all cats like dogs." If I collect a whole bunch of imaginary data, run it through a program like SPSS, and the results turn out that my hypothesis is correct then I have a .05 percent chance that the software is wrong. In that particular imaginary case, I would have committed a Type I Error. This error has a minimal impact because the only bad thing that would happen is some dogs get clawed on the nose and a few cats get eaten.

Now, on a typical experiment, we also have to establish beta which is the likelihood of committing a type II error, that is, accepting a false null hypothesis. So let's say that my hypothesis is that "Sex when desired makes men happy" and my null hypothesis is "Sex only when women want it makes men happy." It's not a bad thing if #1 is accepted but the type II error will make many men unhappy.

Now, this is a give and take relationship. Every time that we make p smaller (.005, .0005, .00005, etc.) for "accuracy," then the risk of committing a type II error increases. A type II error when determining what games 15 year olds like to play doesn't really matter if we are wrong but if we start talking about drugs and false positives then the increased risk of a type II error really can make things ugly.

Next, there are guideline for determining a how many participants are needed for lower p (alpha) values. Social sciences (hold back your Sheldon jokes) that do studies on students might need lets say 35 subjects/people per treatment group at p=.05 whereas with a .005 might need 200 or 300 per treatment group. I don't have a stats book in front of me but .0005 could be in the thousands. Every adjustment impacts a different item in a negative fashion. You can have your Death Star or you can have Luke Skywalker. Can't have 'em both.

Finally, there is a statistical concept of power, that is, there are stats for measuring the impact of a treatment. Basically, how much of the variance between the group A and group B can be assigned to the experimental treatment. This takes precedence in many peoples minds over simply determining if we have a correct or incorrect hypothesis. Assigning p does not answer this.

Anyways, I'm going to go have another beer. Discard this article and move onto greener pastures.

So my questions are: Does being based in Israel provide Facebook's Israeli "subsidiaries" with the ability to use the data from Facebook users differently, that is, in a way that is similar in some aspect to how Israel has access to raw collect NSA data on American citizens in ways that American law doesn't allow? Not to be all conspiracy theory driven but is there a Facebook / NSA connection in this?

I'm thinking back to the earlier /. post on "NSA Shares Intel On Americans With Israel" http://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/09/11/1752223/nsa-shares-intel-on-americans-with-israel