Noo doot aboot it!

the French wikiversion has links to other wireless stations around france. this is a portion of the French emergency communications network to be used in the event of nuclear war. i think this is why France is interested in keeping this off wikipedia, no matter how badly they screwed it up.

And coal comes from a dust-free dispenser next to the tree of gumdrops on lollipop lane. oh wait it's also mined.

The patent information is more than just the 'mini' suffix; they state the "i" in iPad, as well as the "Pad" in iPad, are also merely descriptive. When they named the iMac in 1998, the 'i' prefix was more novel that it was now. i wonder what position that puts the next 'iPhone' in for trademarks.

Apple's (i.e. Jobs') naming strategy was to make product names as simple and representative as possible to the product or function (e.g. iTunes, iMac, iPod). It is interesting that their nomenclature may be a double edged sword in terms of how aggressively even apple could defend such generic trademarks, if one had been given. If this rejection criteria becomes presidence, maybe we'll see "MS Word" and "Adobe Illustrator" also lose trademark privilege.

i guess you didn't read my post too closely.

read, comprehend, then post.

If you are doing a PhD, your subject matter will have to become your hobby. it shouldn't be your only one, but you should be absolutely enraptured with what you're studying. You are guaranteed to run into a dichotomous moment in your 5-7 year program where you will honestly consider quitting. It will only be through your personal passion and drive that gets you through the 'salmon of doubt'.

Since your spot is secured, you either have obtained grants, you have an academic advisor, or both. Spend the summer reading everything your advisor has written, and read everything in your field. If you are coming into a new PhD program you will most likely have a comprehensive exam (ours is verbal) where your committee will test your knowledge in the field to the point they would be comfortable allowing you to research independently. If you have not formed a research committee, use the summer to select internal and external examiners for your project. Selecting your committee is like drafting for a hockey team: there are heavy hitters and there are marginal academics. you may even encounter, as i have, a committee member that will attempt to sabotage your research. that's all part of grad school, so investigate who you're working with through previous students. Your prospective committee's individual publications is a good first step.

Spend the summer reading to the level where you can converse with someone in your field and be able to drop first and last names of the most pertinent research done between the last 50-100 years ago; much of this research (at least in my field of fish larval development) will be in the stacks and in the library; it is incredibly irksome to encounter a PhD candidate that has no references out of what they could pull out of an online paywall. A lack of understanding the foundational research makes the researcher rootless; it is as if a leaf has no idea it is attached to a tree.

Don't stop reading. keep reading. you should be reading already, but keep reading throughout the summer. clearcut an entire state of trees if you need to; keep reading. This is a primary failure mode of the graduate student: not everyone can take graduate school because not everybody can stand having their brain physiologically rewired on a daily basis as they encounter conflicting research, bad research, obscure research, and science-related gossip. Read until you feel comfortable holding conflicting ideas in your head. read until you find yourself asking a question that leads to no answer, and begin to formulate your project from there.

Changing gears slightly, the second most important thing to knowing your pertinent research intimately is the ability to communicate science to non scientists. My program stresses and indoctrinates strong presentation skills. i would highly recommend reading a book like Randy Olson's Don't Be Such a Scientist. Learn the jargon, and learn to internalise the jargon and be able to speak to non-technical audiences. the more you can communicate your message and research, the better you will be.

Good luck!

that point is moot if aerial photography is prohibited.

by that slippery slope argument, you should be invoking Godwin's law in about 30 seconds.

so why not restrict the conference to 15 and above?

thanks, twat!

So what makes it OK to be an unholy prick to people who simply hold a different opinion than your own? earlier in this same comment page you called someone a "sociopathic asshole". If you can do nothing but namecall, then you are someone that does more damage to your own cause than forward it.

This implies a lack of comprehension on your part, or perhaps an inability to engage in high-level thinking. the person you disagree with may be "an unholy prick", but everyone else thinks your an idiot. - Hillary Clinton

utilizing the same terminology, what gave you the right to be a sociopathic asshole in response?

Your response to a request to reiterate your original argument is to attack the response?

how can they review the content of the talk before it is given? judging a presentation based on a submitted abstract is like thinking the Daily Show provides a good summary of current events.

It's too bad that the talk was censored by Ada Initiative; otherwise the rest of the grownups could have made up their own minds on the subject instead of believing your opinion of a talk that never occurred.

extremely insightful that your idea of tangential, may be another person's epiphany. This is the exact purpose of a conference: to listen to new ideas, even if they are not in your narrow field of research.