I think the US system is different, but in the UK you don't pay tax on the first part of your income and a student stipend is non-taxable. This means that you can live very comfortably as a PhD student: the stipend covers your cost of living and then you can earn roughly as much as someone working a full-time minimum-wage job on top of that before you start paying taxes. When I did mine, I was coming close to the tax-free allowance from consulting work, so at the end of it I'd saved enough for a deposit on a house (not a massive achievement: I was living somewhere with very low housing costs).
This also leads to some unfortunate unintended consequences: the main funding body has made it very hard to fund PhD studentships from grants, so the work around is to hire PhD students as research assistants and enrol them as self-funded PhD students. This means that the university charges overhead and the student pays tax, so it ends up costing 2-3 times as much as a funded studentship for about the same level of take-home pay for the student. Worse, they're then above the tax-free income threshold, so they pay tax on top of any other earnings, so PhD students funded on a grant get a much worse deal than ones funded from a scholarship or other award.
If only Samsung had brought in Mr. Whipple to help educate the public.
You want to be behind so you can skip the commercials!
And you typically don't want to be caught watching a game that has already been decided.
Oh no, the horror! Wait, what? I think most people don't want to know the final score till they've seen the game, but I've never met anyone who "didn't want to be caught" watching a completed game. What kind of bizarre personal insecurities cause that? Watching the game on delay has been popular since the VCR appeared, never mind the DVR. (And with the VCR, you had to wait till the game finished before you could start watching.)
It describes the very low level of a program and a computer.
No it doesn't. It describes the very low level of a program running on a computer from 30-50 years ago. The lessons that it teaches about algorithmic complexity are still valid, but the low-level stuff is not. Once you get to limits of the implementation, rather than of the algorithm, artefacts of caches in pipelines are far more important to performance. Not only will you not find, for example, Hopscotch Hash Tables in TAOCP, you also won't find an explanation of the underlying reasons for their performance.
What you said is true, but at the risk of igniting derision in many subsequent comments, Hillary also lost because the American system of presidential elections (for better or worse) weights some votes more than others so that the winner of the popular vote loses the election. This has been endlessly 'litigated' on