Certainly not on their small-form-factor business-class laptops. 16:9 is your only option.

I totally agree with you on this one. The Dell Latitudes have gone downhill since the D630. The latest 13" E series has the same crappy 1366x768 display. This is a business laptop, for gods sake. I don't care if I have to pay $300 more, give me a screen with which I can actually get some work done!

Which version of KMail are you using? Since 4.7.4, it seems to be running nicely.

I just switched to KMail 2 in 4.7.4, and so far it's working out nicely---definitely better than the old KMail. I was quite apprehensive, because I have a complex setup, with multiple IMAP accounts, local mail storage, several identities, and so on, and I had read all the issues people have. But it's working like a charm, and even mail folders with several thousand mails are snappy.

I think there has been a lot of progress since the first official release of KMail2 in 4.7, so I'd definitely give it another try.

Some of the most annoying bugs, like KMail IMAP not surviving a sleep-wake cycle or a brief network outage, are finally gone.

It's the same thing according to the guy who developed the psychopathy checklist:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy
(Go to section psychopathy vs. sociopathy)

What he was saying, which I think is correct, is that you can spot psychopaths easily once you know what to look for.

Look for "antisocial personality disorder". Not all people with antisocial personality disorder are psychopaths, but all psychopaths have antisocial personality disorder.

The archetypical psychopath is actually not a serial killer but a con man/woman.

Clearly you didn't read the abstract of the paper. It says right there. They used an independent test of psychopathy.

Actually, percentage-wise your numbers are pretty much spot on. State funding now hovers around 10-15% in many state schools, and it used to be 50% or more (maybe not 10 years ago, but certainly 20-30 years ago).

That's because it's easy to raise private funds for buildings, but it's much harder to raise private funds for faculty salary.

It's like this everywhere in the US. The UC system receives so little money from the state that some parts of UC have considered leaving the state system alltogether:
http://www.mbamission.com/blog/2011/09/22/mba-news-ucla-anderson-wants-to-go-private/

It is important to mention that throughout the US, tuition has gone up at least partially in a response to declining state funding. If states are not willing to fund their state schools, then the state schools have little option other than operating just like the private schools.

Do you have any evidence to back up this statement, or are you just pulling numbers out of thin air? I highly doubt that's true, in particular if you include biology among the physical sciences. The typical NIH grant runs around $250,000 a year plus overhead. Most computer scientists I know do not have grants of this magnitude.

It may make sense, but it is against the law (at least as far as federal money is concerned). Federal funding agencies regularly check that the funds they give (including overhead) are used specifically for the research project they were allocated to, and not for general university expenses. Overhead can be used for general university expenses to the extent that they are targeted for research.