It’s like, so _hard_ to keep that resume current

This is so rich. George Deutsch, the press aide accused of censoring NASA scientists, has resigned. This after NASA administration reacted to the increasingly vocal complaints by their scientists. Deutsch allegedly told NASA employees that his job was “to make the president look good”.

Michael D. Griffin, the NASA administrator, issued a “statement of scientific openness” to all NASA employees saying, “it is not the job of public affairs officers to alter, filter or adjust engineering or scientific material produced by NASA’s technical staff.”

Well, Deutsch was young and inexperienced. More than we knew. The NYT recently reported that Deutsch faked his resume. Deutsch has since given an interview with the Texas A&M radio station in which he proclaimed his innocence.

The Times reported on Wednesday that contrary to his résumé on file with NASA, Mr. Deutsch, who is 24, never graduated from Texas A&M. Yesterday, in an interview with The Times, Mr. Deutsch said he had written the résumé in anticipation of graduating.

Right. An easy mistake to make, what with all the pressure and work associated with not graduating.

Finally, Deutsch tried to explain his remarks to the designer of an Albert Einstein web site about the origins of the universe.

“We are both Christians, and I was sharing with him my personal opinions on the Big Bang theory versus intelligent design”

Like a background check with attitude

The NYT reports on some new web sites in which women write about the men who wronged them. While the sites may save women from potential heart-ache, they are also open to abuse.

Unearthing a potential mate’s cheating, thieving, maybe even psychotic ways during the early stages of courtship has always been tricky business. But it is particularly difficult today, when millions are searching for dates online and finding it far easier to lie to a computer than to someone’s face.

But the Internet is now offering up an antidote. Web sites like, and are dedicated to outing bad apples or just identifying people who may not be rotten but whose dating profiles are rife with fiction.

While many women find the Web sites amusing and sometimes helpful, they have enraged men, guilty or not […] They argue that the Web sites are biased and damaging, particularly if the story being told is false. And while the women remain anonymous, the men are offered up in full detail.

The sites seem to be thriving because false advertising is epidemic in online dating profiles. Joe Tracy, the publisher of Online Dater Magazine, estimated that 30 percent of daters using online services are married, a number he said has steadily risen.

Sometimes money is no object

Everyone knows that online dating sites are big business. Jupiter Research notes that people looking for marriage are willing to pay more and subscribe to more sites in search of a soul-mate. Looking for Love in All the Possible Places

Serious daters are also more likely to go from browsing to paying at a site, and to keep their subscriptions longer, according to Jupiter Research.
The largest online dating sites are increasingly catering to this lucrative subset. For example, users of Yahoo Personals Premier “for singles seeking long-term compatibility” pay $39.95 a month — $15 more than the standard rate. And for an extra $8.99 — atop the one-month fee of $29.99 — users of can subscribe to MindFindBind with Dr. Phil, which purports “to help you understand more about relationships.”

Why salespeople sandbag forecasts

I’m always perplexed when I hear about sales people and their motivation. I have a job that comes with job requirements and annual performance reviews. And I like to think that my motivations usually line up with those of the company. If I do my job well, the company benefits. If the company does well, I should (eventually) benefit as well.

But sales people are apparently a different breed. If you don’t tune their compensation exactly right, they might go off and do something that benefits them at the expense of the company. As reported by Scientific American, a scientist at HP has been recruiting volunteers to act as sales people, and running experiments to try to determine the best way to boost sales or handle competing resellers.

The experiment simulates interactions between sales agents and sales managers. […] Through a little computer-mediated back-and-forth with their managers, most agents wise up to the fact that this game rewards sales but offers no incentive to tell managers anything. Similar compensation schemes in the real world explain why salespeople tend to sandbag their forecasts, making it hard for their companies to plan ahead.

He’s already had some success. He was able to evaluate a new compensation plan that HP was considering, and determine that it would encourage sales people to push some products while causing total sales to suffer.