Category Archives: public databases

This is embarrassing

OK, so we Texans do need to knock a few pounds off; we’re #12 on the list of “fat states.”  But to get beat out by Oklahoma and …. Michigan?  That’s just wrong.  Worse yet, Louisiana is NOT #1.  This indicates a deplorable lack of pride and standards.

Update (8 July).  Reuters reports the same story, but without a “Top 15″ list.  Which makes me wonder, why 15 and not Top 10?  Was it because Top 10 would not have included Texas?  Just asking…

Citation Networks, visualized

Check out this great visualization of the citation linkages in the sciences.

Tip from R-Bloggers.

Why Texans think Californians are stupid, #4

The City of San Jose has posted their salary data online. Standout entry: the retiring Police Chief at $534,576.

Tip from Drudge.

Transparency, thy name is Texas

The Texas Tribune has a wonderful database of  (Texas) government employee salaries, searchable of course.  Give yourself a big surprise by searching for “Ricardo Romo” (current UTSA President).

Brains per buck

The Center for American Progress has mapped every school district in the nation according to educational return on investment.  How does your school district measure up?

Tip from Joanne Jacobs.

Where the melting happened in the Melting Pot

The NY Times does total information overload about immigrant communities in the US–a fabulous display of a very dense data set.

Tip from Jonah Goldberg at The Corner.

If you live in New York, move to L.A. Then move to Texas

Check out this visualization of American personal migrations.

Tip from Flowing Data.

Update (18 June).  Apparently I’m not the only one who noticed that California has net outflow, Texas net inflow.  Tip from Jonah Goldberg at The Corner.

…and all the Ships at Sea

H-1B visa database

Check out who’s outsourcing in-house, here.  My employer is good for 19 of ‘em.

Tip from Mark Kirkorian at The Corner.

The Latest Rates for HIV

The CDC reports that the overall occurence of HIV in the US is about one-half of one percent, depending on risk group, of course.  Combine these numbers with the published sensitivity and specificity of the fast HIV test, and you’ve got a great lecture on Bayes’ Theorem.

Tip from the Drudge Report.

Update (30 January).  Changed the FDA link for sensitivity and specificity, since the old link reported specificity as 100%, which is ludicrous.