I have tried a lot of ice cream and frozen yogurt and have admittedly become somewhat of an ice cream snob. The following is my top list of companies.

1. Kawartha Dairies
2. Ashby's Sterling
3. TCBY (I've had some nasty TCBY from improperly cleaned and managed soft serve machines)
4. Häagen-Dazs
5. Dove
6. Cold Stone Creamery
7. Ben & Jerry's
8. Blue Bell Creamery
9. Publix
10. Baskin-Robbins

Worst I've ever had:

1. Carvel
2. PET
3. Mayfield
4. Nestle (tasted like styrofoam)

Other:
Dibs
Full Circle
Lowes Foods
Breyers
Blue Bunny
Harris Teeter
Braums
Marble Slab
Dairy Queen

I just finished The End by Lemony Snicket in the Series of Unfortunate Events, though I actually listed to the CD. If you like the previous 12 books, you'll probably like this conclusion. Count Olaf does more scheming, some new characters are introduced, old ones re-appear, and the cycle of mystery continues, but what good is this review without a few spoilers?

On page 6 of Learning in the Field, by Rossman & Rallis, they discuss the difference between basic research and applied research, then they end the paragraph with mentions of "scientists" and "social scientists", but their research contributions go two different ways. How are "social scientists" not "scientists"? Moreover, if they had reversed the definitions of to read as follows, and if I had just been glossing over the section, it sounds reasonable written either way.

Original:
"Scientists" may conduct research that leads to direct practical application; "social scientists" may conduct research that contributes to theory.

Flipped:
"Scientists" may conduct research that contributes to theory; "social scientists" may conduct research that leads to direct practical application.

In the original definition, the original authors of the Big Bang Theory would be classified as social scientists? To compound the confusion, the earlier parts of the chapter all appear to say research should promote learning and improve a social circumstance, where then I would argue that direct practical application is best to improve those disordered circumstances. Is the whole thing a misplaced tangent in the flow of the chapter or am I just going to extremes?

I think multi-touch screens like are just screaming to be popular.

Imagine the dry erase board in the average classroom now being a digital screen, you can draw on with your fingers, save, and project to other places. I know there are some companies experimenting with that business model now with dry erase boards on wheels, but what if what you were drawing on your desk/tabletop?

I don't remember what movie it was, but I think it was Tom Cruise playing a character where he had to kill people to prevent them from killing others. In that movie was a scene where his workspace was a bunch of glass desks with projections of his workspace on them. A smaller scale example was in The Island. I'm guessing the first implementations are going to be extensions existing touchscreen use, like food service. If I were a capital investment company, I'd be looking for someone interested in developing really cool touch screen stuff.

Who does your dentist go to, to get a tooth fixed? When a cancer specialist gets cancer, who do they get to treat them? When a lawyer needs representation, who do they go to? When a banker needs new checks, which ones do they buy? I don't know the answers to the first three questions, but I got an answer to the last.

Ever seen "Catch Me If You Can" with Tom Hanks and Leonardo DiCaprio? The character played by Tom Hanks, Frank Abagnale, is a real person, who designed the "Supercheck". My brother is now one of the people working in a bank that processes checks after they leave your local branch. He highly recommends them, saying the next best thing are the fancy Swiss checks from million-dollar trust funds. I was surprised to see a box of Superchecks is actually the same price I paid for the Harland Humane Society checks I got from my bank.