I've not had Lasik. A friend did, however. He had it done in Mexico. Apparently it costs about half as much there.
The last time I asked him how he felt about the results, he said everything was perfect.
However, he said that in Mexico, they don't give you any anaesthetic while they sear your cornea away. Instead of anaesthetic, a short, heavy-set middle-aged Mexican woman holds your hand.
I think the best explination i've heard, or at least the one I like the most, is someone said Neo is really just a computer program too.
The old "Is Dekkard a Replicant?" dilemmea, eh?
I think, in Revolutions, while Neo is at Zion, in the "Real World," someone will tell him everything around him is an illusion, offer him a blue pill or red pill, he takes the red pill and next thing you know, he finds out he's actually a Cray sitting in Sandia natl. labs. At which point everyone in America storms the box office and demands their money back for all three movies.
I imagine congressional response to e-mails vary widely. I e-mailed everyone on the House Judiciary Committee back when there was only HR 2500 and universally got the response mentioned in the article (form e-mail, if you're not my constituent go away).
I e-mailed my House Rep (Lloyd Doggett, D, TX) and a few days later got a form letter in the mail which spoke directly about HR 2500.
I'm curious: are there any sysadmins out there who have, at one time or another, set up/maintained mail servers for members of the U.S. Congress? If so, what were/are your experiences? Did you have filters which identified postal addresses belonging to the congressperson's district? Any interesting tidbits about the setup?
And again, send a letter on paper if you can (of course, by the time it gets there, it may already be too late). Barring that, send a fax; the aclu website lets you fax your rep for free, with just a few clicks.
I heard about this on NPR yesterday. They read from the text of Scalia's writeup. He laid out a general rule for future cases involving the use of technology to spy into private homes. He said that a warrant is needed for any surveillance of a private home using technology which is not widely available to the public. For instance, it is acceptable for cops to use binoculars or a searchlight to peer thru your windows, without a warrant.
Some issues this "widely available" clause brings up:
What is considered widely available? Just that some private citizen can buy it? Or that some percentage of the publlic can afford?
If "widely available" just means that a private citizen can buy it, could not authorities instruct the tech manufacturers to make it available to the public at ridiculous prices, so that authorities don't need a warrant, while keeping the tech out of the hands of almost all citizens?
How does this ruling affect the use of advanced, secret programs like Carnivore to spy on our computers? Carnivore spies on traffic thru an ISP, so it seems like it's not spying on the PC in the target's home; but the IR imager spies on the IR radiation in the air near the house; if you can't use IR tech from across the street from a house, to spy on IR radiation which emanates from the walls of a house without a warrant, can you use Carnivore or other similar programs from the ISP to spy on packets emanating from the NIC in your home PC without a warrant?
Just some thoughts. Feel free to discuss them.
Slashdot Mirror
I've not had Lasik. A friend did, however. He had it done in Mexico. Apparently it costs about half as much there.
The last time I asked him how he felt about the results, he said everything was perfect.
However, he said that in Mexico, they don't give you any anaesthetic while they sear your cornea away. Instead of anaesthetic, a short, heavy-set middle-aged Mexican woman holds your hand.
The old "Is Dekkard a Replicant?" dilemmea, eh?
I think, in Revolutions, while Neo is at Zion, in the "Real World," someone will tell him everything around him is an illusion, offer him a blue pill or red pill, he takes the red pill and next thing you know, he finds out he's actually a Cray sitting in Sandia natl. labs. At which point everyone in America storms the box office and demands their money back for all three movies.
Maybe it's an excuse to transport materials and labor to build an orbital railgun. One-ups any missle defense shield.
I imagine congressional response to e-mails vary widely. I e-mailed everyone on the House Judiciary Committee back when there was only HR 2500 and universally got the response mentioned in the article (form e-mail, if you're not my constituent go away).
I e-mailed my House Rep (Lloyd Doggett, D, TX) and a few days later got a form letter in the mail which spoke directly about HR 2500.
I'm curious: are there any sysadmins out there who have, at one time or another, set up/maintained mail servers for members of the U.S. Congress? If so, what were/are your experiences? Did you have filters which identified postal addresses belonging to the congressperson's district? Any interesting tidbits about the setup?
And again, send a letter on paper if you can (of course, by the time it gets there, it may already be too late). Barring that, send a fax; the aclu website lets you fax your rep for free, with just a few clicks.
I heard about this on NPR yesterday. They read from the text of Scalia's writeup. He laid out a general rule for future cases involving the use of technology to spy into private homes. He said that a warrant is needed for any surveillance of a private home using technology which is not widely available to the public. For instance, it is acceptable for cops to use binoculars or a searchlight to peer thru your windows, without a warrant. Some issues this "widely available" clause brings up: What is considered widely available? Just that some private citizen can buy it? Or that some percentage of the publlic can afford? If "widely available" just means that a private citizen can buy it, could not authorities instruct the tech manufacturers to make it available to the public at ridiculous prices, so that authorities don't need a warrant, while keeping the tech out of the hands of almost all citizens? How does this ruling affect the use of advanced, secret programs like Carnivore to spy on our computers? Carnivore spies on traffic thru an ISP, so it seems like it's not spying on the PC in the target's home; but the IR imager spies on the IR radiation in the air near the house; if you can't use IR tech from across the street from a house, to spy on IR radiation which emanates from the walls of a house without a warrant, can you use Carnivore or other similar programs from the ISP to spy on packets emanating from the NIC in your home PC without a warrant? Just some thoughts. Feel free to discuss them.
I guess it makes sense, since "overbudget" never stopped a military contractor before . . .