Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Fear (Score 1) 550

by CycleMan (#47526767) Attached to: Laser Eye Surgery, Revisited 10 Years Later
Fear and cost held me back for a long while too. Then I had kids and found myself crouching low, turning upside down, glasses moving as I looked under things to find lost pacifiers, being unable to see the one-year-old crawling on my tummy while I lay on my back, or was caught off guard by little fingers approaching me from the side of my glasses -- it became a safety hazard and I signed up quickly. Rarely regretted it. Maybe once a month, I wake with the physical feeling that there's something in my eye. It tears up for 10-15 minutes. But I can see better, without fingerprint smudges and eyebrow grease and dust on my glasses; the nosepads are never out of alignment nor do the earpieces cause aches. I look and feel different. It is weird in a sense to see so many years of photos of me with glasses, but I like being glasses-free.

Comment: IOL is an option if your cornea is too thin (Score 1) 550

by AlexisKai (#47525179) Attached to: Laser Eye Surgery, Revisited 10 Years Later

If your cornea is naturally very thin, you're ineligible for LASIK because the whole point is to ablate away part of the cornea. I had IOL surgery instead, which is like an implanted contact lens. The trouble with IOL surgery is that there's a 1% chance you'll get a cataract from the lens accidentally rubbing against your natural lens. This ended up happening to me in one eye 12 months after surgery. To their credit, the clinic where I had it done got me back in and gave me a complete lens replacement in that eye at no charge.

Now, a post-cataract-surgery eye is not as good as a normal eye. I would need glasses again were it not for the fact that my other eye is working perfectly with the IOL. So I have one 20/10 eye and one 20/80 eye, but to be honest it's not something I actually notice day to day; the visual cortex sorts it out for you. I do use reading glasses for long computer sessions.

If I had it to do again, I would still do it, because for me life with glasses and contacts was full of daily annoyances and constraints that I no longer have to put up with. Even if I develop presbyopia, my vision will never again be anywhere near as horrendous as it was before surgery. I had a diopter around -8, plus astigmatism. The convenience of life without glasses is worth the hassle of having one post-cataract eye.

Also, one option people often don't think to explore is that you can have _just your astigmatism_ corrected in an outpatient procedure. This procedure is quick and easy and it allows you to use cheaper glasses and contacts (no more "toric" contacts).

Comment: Gardeners have already known this (Score 4, Informative) 67

It's been standard knowledge for home gardeners that growing just one thing (e.g. tomatoes or carrots) in a certain space makes it easy for the bugs that feed on it to find it, but if you mix things up then the pests are confused and less successful. To protect against plant-specific pests, put a variety of things together in your garden: flowers, herbs, vegetables. The good pollinators like honeybees will love it; the carrot fly and tomato hornworm moth will have a much harder time finding the carrots and tomatoes to land on and lay their eggs.

Comment: Match doesn't understand "smart" (Score 5, Interesting) 561

by CycleMan (#47321793) Attached to:, Mensa Create Dating Site For Geniuses's press release includes a hilarious "heat map listing where the smartest singles live," by mapping where Ivy League grads live. Apparently graduates of Stanford, U Chicago, CalTech, UC Berkeley, Northwestern, etc. aren't as smart. More likely, they're just not as rich and historically connected to Daddy's alma mater.

Comment: Re:From the article... (Score 2) 339

by CycleMan (#47114945) Attached to: The Singularity Is Sci-Fi's Faith-Based Initiative

When I pointed this out to the other workers they laughted and said their jobs were safe for the rest of their lives.

Funny that is what I was told when I worked at GM on the truck line, now those jobs are gone. Not to another country, the robots replace the humans.

And if fast food workers succeed in asking for a living wage, I expect that their robot replacements will arrive faster.

Comment: Re:this is fucking bullshit (Score 1) 499

by CycleMan (#46870047) Attached to: You Are What You're Tricked Into Eating

it's uncommon to find cereals with less than 150 calories per 1 oz serving.

Not sure how your math works. At 4 calories per gram for carbs and protein, a 1 oz / 28 gram serving is ~110 calories. It's true for Count Chocula and for Special K both. You can't reach 150 calories unless the cereal contains 8 grams of fat, which is a pretty greasy cereal. More likely you're including the milk in your numbers.

Comment: Re:Ass time (Score 1) 499

by CycleMan (#46869925) Attached to: You Are What You're Tricked Into Eating

I agree that basic cable TV can be a reasonable expense, compared to other entertainment options. Taking a family of four to one movie per month can cost $40, depending on the details. At the same time, the extended packages with the premium sports channels etc. can approach $150/month, at which point it is clearly a luxury.

But if you can feed a family of four on non-organic food for $4800/year, that's 662 hours at minimum wage, or 13 hours/week. I don't take taxes out of that hourly wage, because a family of four that earns minimum wage qualifies for EITC rather than paying federal income taxes.

I would like to know if anyone is aware of a good training/education program (or book) to help folks understand how to cook healthy inexpensive meals that are not too complex (time-consuming) and decently flavorful. I think that would help bridge the gap, and I'd gladly get involved with such a program as my schedule allows.

Comment: Re:Sugar (Score 1) 499

by CycleMan (#46869739) Attached to: You Are What You're Tricked Into Eating

The author Michael Pollan has a simple set of 3 rules for managing your nutrition: 1. Eat food*; 2. Not too much; 3. Mostly plants.

* What he means by this is "real" food, rather than the "edible food-like substances" that constitute the bulk of the American diet. He has a simple rule for identifying real food: If you've ever seen it advertised on TV, it's probably not real food.

Since I don't watch TV, how do I know what is advertised on TV versus what is "real food"?

Remember: Silly is a state of Mind, Stupid is a way of Life. -- Dave Butler