You are a crappy physicist. I know this because you have been relegated to a community college. I am sure you have complete mastery of the subject, but you will never make it in a real research institution because of your mindset. The gatekeeper/elite mindset you almost brag about is very counter productive, it shows your inability to be creative and take risks. The vast majority of professors fall into this category and I believe they are not professionally happy, they wanted to research, not teach at a community college or small rural state school. They structure classes to only allow people like them into the field, pushing out the creative risk takers. The original links point this out and clearly discusses how counterproductive it is. The USA will not achieve its scientific education goals without reforming the current elite professor class, forcing productivity from them. Fortunately the education bubble appears to be close to popping that will push most of these 3rd rate scientists out of a job and we can get a fresh start.

They are demanding for no logical reason except how it was taught to them. Most STEM students just need a one year survey of math course that teaches them how to use the tools that you will use in industry to complete the math related problems you will face and to understand how they work. If you want to be able to do it with a pen a paper from memory you should consider a math minor. If it can be done in Wolfram Alpha, one of its excellent mobile tools or one of its competitors then there is no point in grinding on it. We don't make kids lean arithmetic for the same reasons, calculators are cheep, plentiful and they work.

Teach how the various math disciplines work, where they came from and how to use proper tools to solve them. Freshman Chem/Phys are just math classes with some memorization of simple concepts and high school level lab assignments. Those concepts are diluted by all the math teaching that is not necessary (to make it last four years). It is important to understand that you will use computerized tools to solve almost every one of these "math" issues in your industrial career, if you don't, you are inefficient at your job (academia). If an employee brings me a page+ long handwritten math problem he should expect me to send him back to do it in Mathematica, I don't have time and neither does anyone else to check his work for errors and half the time I cant read his writing, its 2012, everything is on the computer, deal with it.

I am not suggesting just handing them a calculator, they of course need an understanding of how it works and the underlining concepts. Most students get the calculator treatment and no understanding of the underlying math or how to use the the calculator properly. I don't think most math professors understand how to use calculators and computer math tools properly. I can pass the College Algebra CLEP exam with an approved calculator using very limited mental math and no scratch paper. The difference is understanding the concepts of algebra and how to use the calculator (tool) properly. Ten pages of long algebra problems does not give the student time to master the actual subject and they will never do it that way again once they leave academia. Every thing that people had trouble with in Freshman Chem can be determined using the wolfram general Chem assistant mobile app. This form of teaching is great at educating academics who can teach in this manner and pushes out the creative minds and risk takers that will lead to future major discoveries.

Those deaths are not age adjusted, in 2007 the death rate for females aged 5-25 is 0.0511% not 0.16%. So you have a similar risk of an adverse reaction as age adjusted death. That being said, I am far more concerned about the rest of the story. The serious reactions need far more study before this should be compulsorily. Dismissing serious adverse reactions and assuming that the question is solved and undisputable sets a poor stage for from a public health and drug safety perspective. There is far to much SEX, MONEY and POLITICS in this issue and not enough SCIENCE, hu, sounds familiar.

Saying anyone who questions this vaccination is a moron without studying the facts is stupid. Many vaccines are important, others carry untold risks. The discussion of this issue has been beaten back by people worshiping at the church or big pharma and various political and media forces, but never addressing the research. It is important to understand the issue and not just read what talking heads and politicians have to say.

The vaccine in question is primarily used prevent a virus that can cause rare cancers 70% of the time [1]. The death rate of cervical cancer is quite low, 4,021 (0.1660% of total deaths) in 2007 [2]. The risks of death from the cancers in question are are similar dying of gallbladder disorders [2]. As for the laundry list of other rare cancers it is linked to preventing, they are dramatically rarer then cervical cancer, data is to support this is readily found for those that are curious.

The CDC data [3] shows some serious concerns, 20,096 reaction reports including 71 verified deaths over 40 million doses. Of the 20,096 reports, 1,607 (8%) are considered serious. A serious reaction is defines by the CDC as a "report that indicated hospitalization, permanent disability, life-threatening illness, congenital anomaly or death". There is no way to determine that these reactions are not linked to the vaccine without much more study.

I am not convinced that they are being honest about the risks and benefit of this drug. The number of lives it is supposed to save, 2,815 per year (70% of cervical cancer deaths are linked to viruses the vaccine prevents [1]), does not appear to outweigh the risks of a serious reaction. The benefit looks in the margin of error. Stop believing talking heads and politicians, do your own research, we are nerds after all. I have far more faith in medicine to treat me for a condition in the future then to take a risky medication to prevent a virus I will never get because I made it to the the age of 26 without it [1]. Never expect the talking heads or even your doctor to actually understand the research, few doctors are trained in research, they are practitioners fueled by money and boredom.

I may be completely wrong and totally misunderstand the data I see published, this will not stop me from actually performing my own review of the research in an effort to actually understand the issues rather then accept biased claims from everyone.

[1] http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/2008/ucm116945.htm
[2] http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/vaccines/hpv/gardasil.html
[3] http://www.cdc.gov/NCHS/data/nvsr/nvsr58/nvsr58_19.pdf, Table 10

Thats the idea. If they want to do surveillance on you, they actually have to do it. It is not supposed to be easy or cheep for the government to make its case. This makes the government put their attention on the cases that matter.

I am confused by this story... The editors must use iphone's because they lack a basic understanding of how android and its aftermarket distributions work. Its such a simple question for anyone that has paid attention to the andorid space for the last few years or perhaps googled the subject. Its linux... if you have root you can replace the kernel with one that has the NAT module and install iptables... Or just use Cyanogenmod or its competitors who all support it out of the box with fancy graphic click here to make work boxes.

Armed guards are normal and operate without incident, claiming you can send your armed guards out to pillage the communities fuel is quite another thing

yeah... these guys are clearly smoking crack. all we need is another dumb ass with a private army running around nevada thinking they are god.

20 years back linux came out, 19 years ago i started downloading it from bbs's, 18 years ago I installed it.... thanks to SLS and 2400 bps modems!

Sorry to rant at you and not answer your question.

Have we stopped learning/teaching about routing, forwarding and firewalls because the magic NAT box does all of that for us? This is a sad state for the world of networking that such a question must be asked.. repeatedly... by people who should know better.