Comment Re:Drank one before I proposed to my wife (Score 5, Informative) 500
THERE IS NO MOVIE. IT IS ONLY A BOOK. Well, a trilogy of five books. (And a radio broadcast... and some other things... BUT NO MOVIE!)
Lots of phone have Java EE
Probably just a typo, but to my knowledge no phones support Java EE; you probably meant Java ME. I can't comment on the rest of your post, as I have no idea if it is possible or even feasible to compile Javascript into Java bytecode...
It would be an absolute pain in the ass but as it uses the SATA standard there should be a way of connecting up the pins and getting the data off somehow.
True, but that would involve desoldering it first. BGA packages have the pins on the bottom, which means you can't just use probes on the side of the chip to get access to them. If it was in a socket, of course, it would be trivial, but the cost of a socket compared with the 1% of customers who will actually use it, chances are most manufacturers will just not bother.
Really, unless you are putting other people's lives in danger you shouldn't be convicted.
Absolutely not. I am fairly liberal person (don't care for excessive drug laws, overall I am of the opinion that you can do what you want as long as you don't hurt others), but saying that people can drive drunk as much as you want unless you are endangering others is way over the line. The fact is that you (or a cop, or a judge) cannot know whether you are endangering others until you have already done so. Say you are drunk, and swerving around a country road. You can argue that there is nobody there, so nobody gets hurt; what about the teenager walking home on the side of the road which you don't see until it is too late. What about the grandma driving around the corner which you don't notice until she is right there. As far as I am concerned, as soon as you are driving while intoxicated, you *already are* putting others lives in danger, whether you know it or not. It's really simple people -- we don't care what you do to yourself, but stay off the roads after you have done it! I am in full support of zero tolerance, get caught one time and you lose your license immediately. Don't like it? Too bad, there is no reason why you have to drunk and drive.
Outside of towns, the posted speed limit was 60 MPH, with a posted minimum speed of 45 MPH. In the towns, the speed limit was usually either 35 or 25 MPH. Note that there's at least a 10 MPH difference between the minimum speed limit outside of town and the maximum speed limit in town, thus requiring an instantaneous velocity change.
Or you can, you know, look ahead and make intelligent judgements ahead of time (i.e., slow down before you get right to the new speed limit sign). The posted speed limit is not saying you have to go exactly that speed; it is saying that is the maximum which you are permitted to go. Seriously, how difficult is that to understand, people! Either you are being deliberately obtuse, or you have an IQ lower than those speed limits you are breaking.
The Mississippi River pours as much water into the Gulf of Mexico in -38 seconds- as the BP oil leak has done in two months.
Wake me up when the Mississippi river is pouring that much oil into the Gulf of Mexico. That's like saying "you have 10 grams of arsenic in your body? That's nothing - you have 1000 times more water already there!"
On the other hand, PRK has fewer complications and gives you much more leeway for future surgery.
At least, that's what the folks at the LASIK centre told me (looking to get it done later this year - still haven't decided on PRK vs LASIK).
That is why I chose PRK over LASIK. In LASIK the cornea never completely heals, and (according to some studies) only ever regains a small percentage of the strength of an unaltered cornea. For most people this is not an issue, but for me (due to martial arts and an otherwise active lifestyle) I felt that PRK was the better choice. The recovery time is definitely longer, though; it has been over a month and I still am not quite at my BCVA (best corrected visual acuity) of 20/15; I am currently at 20/20+1 in my right eye and 20/25-1 in my left. However, this is still improving slowly; apparently it takes about 6 months for the eyes to completely heal and provide stable vision again.
That being said, I am still quite happy with my choice; while my visual acuity has not yet reached my previous acuity with glasses, I am still seeing better than I ever had before without glasses, and can do things outside without worrying about rain and stuff getting on my glasses. For me, it was worth it, and PRK was the correct decision, but be sure to talk with your surgeon and eye doctor at length about the options, and which is best for you.
Cheers
Forgot to add: I think LASIK is also quite a bit cheaper, since it's much more common - most people are budget driven.
From what I have seen in my area at least, PRK is actually cheaper -- the reason being that there is no need for a microkeratome or Intralase laser to create the flap. Licensing for the Intralase is a couple hundred per patient, and the cost is passed on to you. My PRK surgery was $1600 / eye, whereas LASIK would have been $1800. (Granted, this is in Canada, from a highly respected and reputable surgeon; in the USA YMMV).
You have a message from the operator.
