Hello and welcome back to my little neck of timber! If you’re coming here from scienceblogs, thanks for following me over here! If your here because you started randomly surfing the internet like the teleportation portion of the PageRank algorithm, well, then, you are and odd duck, but welcome!
Not sure where this blog will take me this time, but right off the top I should warn you:
Beware of Dave!
What, no “We apologise for the inconvenience”. That’s how the book ends!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I apologize for the inconvenience!
Damn, you’re right I missed a good line
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
IMHO the world needs all the Bacon it can get! So please keep us posted on Baby Bacon’s progress … and uhhh … say … does baby Bacon have a name yet? He is one fine-lookin` little dude!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I see an ad for “University of Phoenix” on your new homepage. Isn’t this a conflict of interest?
p.s. I clicked on the ad. Don’t let that penny payment burn a hole in your pocket!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Thanks for the penny. I will give it to old Ben Franklin, he seemed to like them
Didn’t you hear: Scientists (capital S) never have conflicts of interest like: promoting their work, selling their books, promoting higher education, and in general never ever ever trying to keep the flood of research dollars flowing. Oh wait.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Was that cynical? Ah, feels good to be home (I will say that as someone who loves hacking, it feels REAL nice to be back in control of the plumbing. I should have a mobile version of the website working soon. It’s amazing that LaTeX support was never installed on scienceblogs despite numerous promises and lots of complaining.)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
One other thing, I think the problem I really had with PepsiCo was more one of business. Supposing that they did full disclosure (which I think they are working on), I still think it was a bad idea because it dilutes their brand. I’m certain I would have learned something from PepsiCo research scientists (even with spin) but the brand of Scienceblogs would seem to me to be diluted (it’s not me who says this, it’s the readers, and they define the brand.) And I suppose in some way this hurts my own reputation, though less of epsilon is an even smaller epsilon.
Anyway it’s fun to watch [noms on some popcorn.]
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Oh and as pointed out to me in the tweetverse, if you substitute “brand” for “scientific credibility” the argument works as well, thus bringing some form of “moral” justification to the table.
I do believe I am at a table with only myself
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Does this mean we can start bugging you about LaTeX support?
Followed over from Pesiblogs (just a lurker there). If you do get LaTeX working here, see if you can’t get MCC’s Good Math/Bad Math to follow you in. We need a good math-heavy blog center.
Do keep writing, whatever happens!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I am glad you’re back here. I never fully understood the need for successful bloggers to join an umbrella organization. Did you get more readers when you moved to Pepsiblogs (good one!)?
In any case, enjoy little Bacon. The I.P. Freely phase will stop soon, and then you’ll miss it…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Pieter: yeah I got about a 2-4x bump in readers at Scienceblogs, and definitely a broader audience. I think having a community of fun bloggers is a fine idea and there is something to be said for the model. On the other hand, I fashion myself a rugged individualist, so I’m happy to be back in my obscure corner of the universe.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’ve posted a link to this from my Facebook page, so that my 1,027 “friends” can learn where you’ve moved, and why. I likewise posted the same kind of protest text and link for Mark C. Chu-Carroll. I’m glad that Science can take a stand, through people with firm convictions, against crass commercialism. Otherwise Millikan Library at Caltech will become Microsoft Library or McDonald’s Doubleburger Library…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0