[guanotronic.com|~serge]  
  [php.net]

"All the news that's fit to be put into a MySQL database and then retrieved dynamically with a PHP script..."



2007-02-09 10:32:43
    putting us in our place

    Graduate students are often overlooked. We write the papers, often teach the classes, and don't officially get any vacation time, since we're expected to be in the lab 24/7. Why should Congress stop to think about us? With all this talk about promoting higher education, increasing access, and making it more affordable, it comes as no surprise that graduate students will get shafted. Despite the talking points about promoting competitiveness through graduate degrees in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) fields, the House has voted to make interest rate cuts on subsidized Stafford loans only apply to undergraduates.

    Unfortunately, graduate students are more deserving of these cuts as they have higher debt burdens. According to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), the average undergraduate graduates with $19,000 in student loan debt. At the same time, the average master's student will owe $30,000. The average doctoral student will owe $52,000. Additionally, undergraduate students are likely to be supported by their parents, whereas most graduate students are solely responsible for their room and board, tuition, and any other expenses. Those students who are lucky enough to receive a stipend are not much better off, as the average graduate stipend is below the poverty line.

    Some might argue that these conditions are temporary, since a graduate degree holds more earning power. This is often not the case. Public schools are increasingly requiring master's degrees for new teachers. In another example, a friend's husband just got a job offer as a postdoc at CMU in the Math Department; upon graduating from undergrad, I had a job offer for 20% more working in the corporate world. Holding a bachelor's degree and starting at a law firm trumps holding a PhD working at one of the nation's top research universities. Academic jobs require graduate degrees, yet often pay less than many jobs requiring just a bachelor's. Yet the jobs requiring graduate degrees are critical to our society, nation, and the world.

    The passing of this House bill was publicized by most mainstream media outlets. Yet none of them examined how it would affect graduate students. They gave Congress a big pat on the back for managing to pass a bill that does something for education, yet failed to report on the greater ramifications. So I wrote this letter to the NYT:


    To the Editor:

    Re "House Cuts Interest Rates for Some College Loans" (Jan. 17th):

    It is laudable that Congress appears to be making a concerted effort to increase access to higher education for everyone. Cutting the interest rates on subsidized Stafford loans may encourage more students to attend college by making it more affordable for the students and/or their parents. Advanced degrees are necessary in order for our country to retain its competitive edge in the few areas where we still lead the world.

    Unfortunately, this legislation excludes graduate students. Graduate degrees are becoming increasingly required for everything from cutting-edge research fields to becoming a teacher. Faced with the choice of going to graduate school and paying higher interest rates (as well as paying tuition and living expenses without parental support), or getting a job and earning an income, many students will be discouraged from seeking higher degrees because of this legislation. Hopefully the Senate will be less myopic.

    Serge Egelman
    Pittsburgh, PA, January 18, 2007
    The writer is the Legislative Chair for the National Association of
    Graduate-Professional Students (NAGPS)

    Unfortunately, the Senate was not less myopic. S. 359 (H.R. 5's Senate version) was introduced with the same language as the House version.



2006-11-08 10:24:45
    CMU Parking hates voters?

    In 2004, during the election, I went with two other people to the polls to help out and document irregularities. We found that many students were going to the wrong polling place, so we began giving them rides. It worked so well, that I decided to organize rides for voters this year, to and from CMU. I did this through GSA and was able to recruit about a dozen volunteers. The plan was to hang around the circular driveway/waiting area at the University Center, known as the "UC turnaround." We had planned on setting up lawn chairs and grilling for the volunteers. As there are signs out there saying you can only wait for three minutes, and must be in your car, I figured I should clear this with the head of parking, Michelle Porter.

    I called up Michelle last week and explained that we would have at least two cars driving people every half hour, and might be hanging around the UC turnaround for a few minutes in between trips, with volunteers in close proximity to their cars. She said this was fine, but asked for my phone number in case something came up. I gave it to her. Cut to yesterday.

    After returning from driving a few undergrads to go vote, I walked away from my car to the lawn chairs that we had set up and poured a cup of coffee. No less than five minutes later, one of the other volunteers noticed that parking enforcement is ticketing cars in the area. I noticed that The Enforcer had already ticketed two of our cars, and was working on mine. I assumed that the confusion had arisen because they didn't know which cars were ours. So clearly it's just a matter of going over there, explaining the situation, and they'll cancel the tickets. Right.

    I explain that we're driving voters, and we had permission to use the area for this from his boss. That's funny because he said he knows, and was under direct orders from his boss to ticket all of us. I immediately call her up, with The Enforcer standing next to me (this is all from memory, and is not meant to be a verbatim account of what was said):

    "Hi, this is Serge Egelman, from GSA, we spoke last week about the voter thing?"
    "Yeah, you guys need to move your cars."
    "But you said we could use the area?"
    "Right, but you said it would be only one car, and that you would be in it at all times, and that it wouldn't be standing for more than three minutes. You weren't in the cars, and therefore weren't standing."
    "No, I didn't. I said it would be at least two cars, and we would be sitting in lawn chairs a few feet away."
    "Now you're lying to me."
    "Wait, I pretty clearly said there would be at least two cars and we would be sitting nearby, waiting for voters. If I said we'd be in the cars and for only three minutes, why would I call you for permission, since that's allowed per the signs?"
    "Stop lying to me."
    "Okay, there's clearly some miscommunication going on here. If you want us to move the cars somewhere else, that's fine, I'm willing to rectify the situation. But as a show of good faith, can you please do something about these tickets?"
    "No, you lied to me, there was no miscommunication, the tickets stand because you weren't in your vehicles."
    "I think you're being a bit unreasonable, I really do want to try and work with you here. Where can we move the cars, and what can be done about these tickets?"
    "The cars aren't my problem, they just need to be gone. You'll have to pay for the tickets."
    "Okay, well, I really regret that we could not find a more amicable solution here."
    "What's that supposed to mean?"
    "We'll talk later."

     At which point I hung up the phone. Meanwhile, The Enforcer has finished ticketing my car and all the other cars in the UC turnaround. The tickets were for $75 each.

    One nice thing about being involved with GSA is that we meet regularly with administration types. We get along well with most of them. For instance, just last week we had a meeting with the provost. In fact, while I was waiting to take voters at around 8 or 9 that morning (I don't remember the exact time, it's all a blur as I had gotten up at 4:30), the Assistant Vice Provost for Graduate Education, Suzie Laurich-McIntyre, came over to say hi. She asked how we were doing, and then eventually went to her office.

    After hanging up on Michelle Porter, I walked over to Suzie's office to apprise her of the situation. I told her what was said on the phone, and she said she would give Michelle a call, and then come over to us afterwards. I leave with anticipation.

    After getting back to our base camp, I realize that one of the cars ticketed wasn't actually ours, and another person who I thought was ticketed wasn't actually since he was in his car when this went down. I try and look up Suzie's number to tell her it's only two ticket, but I can't find it anywhere. Eventually she comes over to us, and I immediately say, "I tried to find your number to tell you that it's only two tickets." She responds, "it doesn't matter how many tickets it was, you can mail anything you got back to Michelle."

    We eventually get permission to bag *one* meter near where we were (why they wouldn't give us more, now that there were four drivers is preposterous). But we find that three others were broken, and we eventually get enough space for our cars. I continue talking to Suzie about this whole situation and thank her repeatedly for all her help. During this time, I ask why Michelle felt the need to ticket us without any warning. "She said she didn't know what you looked like, so I told her that she could have just gone to where you guys were, since you were pretty visible." I agreed and added, "she didn't happen to tell you that she also had my cell phone number?" "She didn't mention it."

    While it seems pretty clear that Michelle Porter's behavior was rather inappropriate, I am worried that she used her position as head of CMU parking to prevent students from getting out to vote. This is deplorable. We were doing this in a non-partisan manner and managed to drive 65 people (undergrads, grads, and some staff) to vote.

    UPDATE: I ended up scheduling a meeting vis-à-vis with Michelle, Suzie, and Brian Fifarek (GSA president). When I walked into her office, I was immediately caught off-guard at how nice she was (which was a complete about-face from her demeanor during our phone conversation). She agreed it was a misunderstanding, and basically told us next time we can use any metered spaces we want. So anyway, the situation was resolved, and kudos to her for deciding to work with us.



2006-10-30 18:09:03
    some people drunk dial....

    After a long night of drinking in NYC with my sister a day after I went there to see Massive Attack, I wrote this letter to the NYT at around 5am that night (final call is 4am, my flight back to Pittsburgh was at 6am):

    To the Editor:

    Re "Tell Me, O Muse, of the Amazin’ Mets," (Oct. 8):

    Almost 3,000 soldiers have died in Iraq stemming from what appears to be a lie, millions of Americans do not have health insurance, the House Republican leadership has just been caught covering up for a pedophile, Congress has just legalized the torture and detention of foreign nationals, and no one seems to care that our government has been intercepting our phone calls for the past five years. Yet David Brooks seems to find it fit to dedicate his space to conjecture about a baseball team's prospects in the post-season.

    Do we really not have any more important national issues to discuss? Inquiring minds want to know. Is the outcome of a baseball game really more important than the disappearance of our collective moral compass?



2006-09-26 22:12:25
    do unto others....oh, fuck it

    The national debate is currently whether or not it is permissible to torture people. I'll repeat that: the national debate is currently whether or not it is permissible to torture people.

    A few years ago, this is something that someone would expect to see as the headline for The Onion (e.g. "Bush: Torture A-OK!"). But then again there are many hot issues right now which would have made good Onion articles:

    • Warrants no longer needed for domestic spying.
    • Saddam stands trial for war crimes committed two years *before* Rumsfeld visited.
    • Good: throwing away stem cells. Bad: using them for life-saving research.

    How far we've come.

    What makes this sad is that over half of Congress is actually in favor of torture. Though they don't want to call it torture, that's just not politically correct! It's now known as 'coercion,' and is defined as anything short of "mutilation, rape, or murder." Use your imagination.



2005-03-21 18:00:06
    Now that we've solved all the other problems...

    In the course of doing some research for a journal paper that I'm working on, I came across this resolution from last month. It's nice knowing that Congress has erased the deficit, made peace in the middle east, and eliminated poverty at home, amongst other things, and can now pass a resolution to pat themselves on the back for their contributions towards western civilization. In responcse, I've drafted my own resolution which I am going to send to the authors and ask that they sponsor it:

    Recognizing the deliciousness of beer.

Whereas beer is concocted by artfully mixing water, grain, hops, yeast, and
malt;

Whereas beer has been a cornerstone for not just Western Civilization, but
civilization as a whole for over 6,000 years;

Whereas the founding fathers of this country both enjoyed drinking beer as well
as brewing beer;

Whereas if young people are taught to understand and appreciate the
deliciousness of beer, the United States will become less vulnerable to social
division, mutual distrust, and animosity;

Whereas some countries have laws regulating which ingredients are to be included
in beer, yet the United States and its citizens enjoy the freedom to brew beer
however they see fit;

Whereas the enjoyment of beer crosses national and cultural borders allowing
individuals to put aside their differences while enjoying a tall frosty pint
together:

	Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
	concurring), That Congress--

	(1) recognizes the importance of beer in promoting global peace, human
	understanding, compassion, and respect; and

	(2) recognizes the importance of beer in easing international relations, and
	understanding of both United States foreign and domestic policy; and

	(3) encourages the promotion and enjoyment of beer and all beer-related
	activities in a responsible manner.



Show all articles 		other nonsense


 



my stuff

me

spam




 



resume

XML

HTML

TXT

PDF




 



digicam.guanotronic.com


france07

SA-film

burningman07

darkroom

cat



 



search