If you want to see my surgery from the surgeon's end of things, Here you go!
Yes, they gave me a DVD of it.
iLASIK is done with all lasers, one to make the flap that was previously done by blade, and the usual LASIK after that. Fewer reported complications than with the older blade style. At my six month checkup I was seeing 20/10 from my left eye and 20/15 from my right. I'm 48 and previously wore progressive lenses. They adjusted my right for a closer focal distance.
It all just works, I love it.
Link to Original Source
The article also states Britain is often used as test grounds for privacy violation.
"... because in Britain the respect for individual privacy, he said, 'is not strongly encoded in law or policy.'
Because it has fewer restrictions, British intelligence platforms 'are used as a testing ground'""
Link to Original Source
Quick thought for you: even if every single word you say is 100% true, and every single thing you believe about climate change is 100% true, are you really doing anything (other than perhaps gaining some cathartic release from Internet bullying) positive by ranting on Slashdot? Are you helping your cause at all by shouting at and belittling your opponents?
I consider myself without a clan in the climate wars, and rude a**holes on either side are by far the biggest turnoff. Take it for what it's worth.
So laws like North Carolina's ban on considering any global warming effects beyond 30 years? Pretty much criminal, and obviously written by a bunch of 70-year-olds who don't think they'll need a beach house after that, plus some 50-year-olds who think they'll be retired from politics by then. I used to live in Delaware and New Jersey, both states with beach industries constantly affected by erosion and flooding, and North Carolina's coastline is the same way. If the sand washes away your property values drop and then your house washes into the ocean, and when the barrier islands are gone, the mainland starts to go pretty fast also.
I pretty much entirely disagree with you.
First things first, I live in North Carolina and my family has been going to the same island on the outer banks for about 60-70 years now. It's a part of the state I feel connected to and where I would really like to see NC avoid so many of the abominable excesses of the Northeast, Florida, etc. I've met and talked with Orrin Pilkey about some of these very same issues. We agree on many things but not all things.
I think we need major reform to insurance laws and who pays when beach property owners suffer losses. I don't it's fair to privatize profits (rentals, etc) but socialize the costs (beach replenishment, hurricane damage repairs, etc).
I think we need major limits on the kind of beach construction that is allowed (again, let's avoid the Northeast and Florida models), and where it is allowed.
I actually think NC, so far, has done a pretty good job of maintaining its beaches and islands and natural spaces. That's one of the reason the coast fills up with Ohio, Pennsylvania, NY, etc license plates every summer.
On to the juicy stuff!
Issues of jetties, replenishment, dredging, erosion, viability of coastal roads, etc, are all linked to the climate (and therefore climate change), but are also independent of effects 30 years out. If a beach is eroding TODAY (and some are--some are replenishing today--that's the way it goes!), stakeholders are going to want it dealt with today, consequences be damned. Forget the consequences 30 years out! If enough beach property owners make noise and can get a jetty built today, well, ignore the immediate consequences, it's built. The 30-year time frame is again irrelevant to the stakeholders.
The island I go to every year has horrible erosion on the north and the middle. They are constantly dredging and replenishing certain parts of the island. This has very negative effects on the beach and sea life, and is, at best, a temporary patch. They're also losing the battles. Some of the older houses are literally sitting in the water at high tide. On the south end of the island, the island is growing, The beaches are getting bigger, and the island is actually migrating south. That's just what barrier islands (non-rocky islands) do. At some point those on the north of the island are going to have to bite the bullet and lose their properties (or more like lose their properties in a hurricane and not be allowed to build). I say, tough luck, but if you chose to build or buy on the beach, you have to be prepared to take those risks.
So, please don't take this as a defense of beach property owners and stakeholders, it's just an "it is what it is" situation.
Getting to climate change models though, that's a different question entirely. For one thing, I (personally) have no trust in the models beyond thirty years. I don't have any faith in the models at thirty years truthfully. I do not believe it has been demonstrated that climate predictions of thirty years ago--or, specifically in the beach context we're discussing, ocean levels predictions of 30 years ago--are accurate. I doubt our predictions today are any better. Second, the 30-year window is a rolling window. If trends accelerate over the next 5 five years, well, the models can account for heightened results over the NEXT thirty years.
I don't know you or your beliefs at all, but like so many things in our society today, I think this particular "NC rethuglicans bans global warming AND HATE THE PLANET Zomg!!!!" talking point meme is way overblown and has become part of a needlessly didactic argument. It's not nearly so simple an issue as you seem to think.
Remember how Snowden should have raised his concerns with his superiors within the NSA?
Remember how no such communication could be found?
Remember how one such communication was released but did not seem to be raising direct concerns?
Well some record of e-mail communications seems to exist but they are exempt from public disclosure under the federal Freedom of Information Act."
Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
Want metal? Come on Motorhead's Motorboat September 22-26! "The loudest boat in the world!"
Motorhead, Anthrax, Megadeth, Wilson, High on Fire and a host of others...
Personally, I'm really getting interested in Meteor (www.meteor.com). Watch the videos, and realize I saw a smart non-coder go from zero to *ridiculously* interactive site design in three months.
Print encyclopedias had to be picky about editing, because even edited down they were still 100lbs and took up feet of shelf space.
A digital encyclopedia has no such constraints. It can be a repository for everything, at no cost.
The "not notable" constraint is totally artificial and serves only as an outlet for the petty-minded to exert some small degree of power.
Says the "Anonymous Coward".
Oh, the irony.
Where Wikipedia fails HARD though is the article deletion process.
There are people out there who get a weird thrill from deleting articles.
An article that has been in place for *10 years* can be snuffed out just because a motivated moderator decides it isn't "notable" and sets up a "speedy delete".
Notice 6 months after the fact, try and put it back, and the whole friggin' WORLD descends on you.
Wikipedia is ruled by a group of petty, self-nominated bureaucrats. And the system - as horribly broken as it is - cannot be reformed, because there are too many vested interests who want to see it STAY broken.