ecoli

wow phi, what a witty, subtle sense of humor you have.

My format (the basic NIH style) is as follows: Name, address, email Education/ degrees/ majors [relevant] employment and research experience Dates, Title, Organization PI or supervisor and 1 bullet point about the work Awards (date and title) Publications (including abstracts and reviews) Memberships in professional societies/clubs Grades [if transcript isn't submitted separately and its not for a job]

how much programming experience do you have? You might want to start out with a basic intro course, unless that would be wasting your time.

Added an option for my vote, hope that's ok Moontan

Phi - it's just a narrative they [politicians in general] have to keep going so that they keep getting reelected.

Amoung other things, a giant tech bubble that occurred during Clinton's reign popped during Bush's. Of course, this happened in a vacuum of other expansions of the federal budget (which Bush does have responsibility for), but Clinton usually gets way too much credit for having a balanced budget during his office, considering the budget surplus of 2.4% of GDP was completely unexpected by the CBO - so you can probably discredit any of Clinton's policies for growing the economy. http://my.firedoglake.com/deanbaker/2012/09/09/clintons-surpluses-were-due-to-the-stock-bubble/ Oh and remind me who signed the repeal of Glass-Steagel again before the Clinton love fest starts? Furthermore, the national debt did not decrease at all during the Clinton era.. while public debt went down (again largely due to the tech bubble) intragovernment debt did not. In this case, revenue from social security taxes exceeded payments so SS had to, by law, buy treasury bonds with the surplus. This caused the deficit to decrease (but never did the national debt go down) but when the bubble burst, the treasury couldn't pay back the social security fund. Which I suspect largely erased the gains from the bubble. You'll notice that none of this was Clinton's policy. Probably his tax hikes helped with the deficit, but ultimately not with paying down the debt.

awesome diagram, thank you for the visual.

So you're saying that there's positive racism?

compared to what? They're good at divorcing their analytic, skeptical side when it comes to accepting arbitrary cultural beliefs. define 'so many'... absolutely, if any evidence came along. Can you say the same? not anytime soon, obviously. I'm guessing not a strong correlation when controlling for factors such as socio-economic status, education, etc. as a cultural phenomenon, yes. because you people keep starting them!

maybe the Romneys are just trying to make a buck off the political process (state government will be spending a lot of money on these machines). That would be bad enough even without allegations of trying to control the political process. I agree that it appears improper and its a poor move if the Romney's campaign has anything to do with it, but I don't just see the hysteria that's been over the internet.

you could come to the opposite conclusion as well. By 'normalizing' gay identity, students won't seek to 'become gay' as a way of rebelling against society or to counter-signal to peers. By encouraging openness and acceptance as part of normative social influence, kids will be less likely to use sexual identity, as much as it is a choice, as a hipsterism. Which is just one argument of the anti-gay right that fails on its face. Adults are generally oblivious to what children are exposed to in this day and age (the internet... heard of it?) Having an adult provide a different frame of references for exposure to drugs, sex, alcohol, rock n roll then what a kid will get "on the street" is helpful. Even if most kids will roll their eyes at 'authority' they are not likely to hear about the costs from anywhere else. At what age this is appropriate is up for debate, I agree.

oops typo. I meant Voting. Again,where is the evidence of foul play?

I'm confused to how owning a company that makes polling machines equate with corruption with the voting process. It's odd certainly but not definitive.

how about something like this: [math] \frac{r_w}{R_w + P_w} + \frac{r_t}{R_t + P_t} [/math] [math] r_w [/math] is a user's rep from the past week [math] R_w [/math] is the SFN total for rep given in the past week [math] P_w [/math] is the SFN total post count from the past week [math] r_t [/math] is a user's Total rep [math] R_t [/math] is SFN's total rep [math] P_t [/math] is SFN's total post count haven't fully vetted this or simulated a range of variables but think it accounts for a reasonable mix of close range, total factors and reputation and posts, though perhaps not in the exactly correct balance. Also could add a term to balance the other user's average score. Weekly could easily be changed to any arbitrary time period.

So if you have a slow week your rep disappears? This seems like a good idea to encourage active posting, but probably a good way to kill the whole rep system.

how would you handle zeros? Either from zero posts or zero rep

My posts per rate, as suggested by Michel, is somewhat abyssal: 26.48 reps/post, so I'm going to protest this though it really should be rep/posts so the number is fractional and increasing with reputation. Actually I think would have to be a bit more nuanced than this simple rep rate. Maybe a 'bayesian' model where each rep vote is taken as evidence for your true reputation, with current rep as a prior. Could hopefully counteract longevity a bit.

What is this.. the 13th thread in recent months about people complaining about the rep system? Funny how its usually people making threads in spec forum who complain the most. How many people actually care about a users rep when reading a post? I hardly even notice this feature when reading threads.

Here are 5 lies by Joe B in one sentence: http://i.imgur.com/JgiFM.jpg *edit: ok maybe not 5 individual lies, but the point is made.

I hear they just gave the Nobel Prize in medicine to an attenuated influenza virus.

Ding, ding, ding! Political debates need on stage fact checking and sources for all statements. Our worst days on the politics forums are still better than these televised slugfests. And this VP, town hall style debate is the worst of them. In no reasonable, well-structured debate format is there a section where debaters are allowed to talk over each other and interrupt the moderator. That said, I think Biden did a good job chortling like a disgruntled skeptic and Ryan was quite good at inheriting Romney's smirk.

r/spaceclop

I believe the Duesberg/Mullis prevailing theory is glucocorticoid drugs. Ironically, glucocorticoids have been shown to stimulate HIV replication and AIDs progression in [real] scientific studies. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11282284

You don't get that by outlawing abortion. That point has been beaten to death. And what constitutes a valid reason. This is far too arbitrary. The vast majority of what PP does is distribute and educate on contraceptives and STI testing. an aborted fetus has no potential for future life, whether aborting by natural causes or human caused.

Come on, man, look at this smirk: