There's two parts to the bill AFAIK, the heads up glasses and that the computer is a wearable computer. It appears that it's OK to wear the glasses if they are connected to, say, a notebook, or a table, etc (maybe even a smart phone).

Yeah, I'd like my sense of smell back ...

I'm not sure that would make me feel better...

How about that! Some time around 1945-1948 my mother objected to me reading comics and I replied that there was a stamp/icon on then that said that some educational group approved the comics. She must have rolled her eyes. I had quit reading them before 1954. There was a great rise of "juvenile delinquency", especially in cities, at that time and "experts" came up with all sorts of reasons, completely untested reasons mostly. We now know that much if it was due to lead from leaded gasoline and from leaded paint in the environment.

Can't wait until I pull onto a freeway with one of these, driven by an idiot, suddenly is spotted in my rear view mirror fish-tailing and spinning towards me as the driver attempts to slow down and miss me. It'll be the experience of a lifetime. Of course I may not see this for the rest of my life.

Were people really saying that about comic books 50 years ago? I sure don't remember that but then I was in the Navy and mostly out of the US. Of course they were saying that reading lots of comics might stifle ones reading ability (include TV here). They were right about TV IMHO.

The Hays code was expressly designed to ensure movies were not sending a message of immorality - which kinda translates to "don't show or imply anything which might suggest sex" and make sure everything is in "good taste".

On the other hand (hehehe) my son's speed on a smart phone is amazing.

Yes, federal workforce are those civilians who receive a Federal paycheck, but that can include permanent full time, career conditional (not yet permanent), temp, term, part time, interns, students, and seasonal (I think that's most of the categories). Right now this may not include the Judicial system nor the Postal Service - I'm not certain. Some agencies make use of agencies that provide contract workers but they are not 'federal workers'. With sequestration agencies may need to cancel some contracts that provide workers (or goods and services) and many seasonal workers will not be hired.

I don't know how seasonals and workers other than permanent will be treated but expect that they can 'just' be let go more or less. There are also contracts for some jobs for "as needed" workers and I imagine that they won't be activated unless it's an emergency and then other employees man need to be furloughed to pay for them.

That's not how it works at all. First almost everyone is furloughed, that is, gets unpaid holidays. DoD will furlough their 800,000 civilian employees one day a week starting April 1. So 800,000 will loose 20% of their pay! Other Departments/Agencies my furlough more or less days per week or delay until after April 1. Of course employees don't spend what they don't get and the deductions for health plans and retirement stay the same. AFAIK the furloughs can last only 22 workdays or 30 calendar days and then a RIF (reduction in force starts automatically). When furloughs will start depends on the financial state of the Federal agency. Some, such as DoD will start at the earliest time, April 1. The Forest Service (US Dept. of Agriculture) will be able to hold off until 1 May or later, for instance.

The reduction in force list is developed mostly by formula and depends on skills, seniority, military service, etc. I think that most of the lists have been (or are being compiled) but not released. An employee on the RIF list can 'bump' a an employee not on the list if the employee is qualified for the position (some other conditions, too) and then that employee can bump someone else and so on. RIFs are expensive in present but will result in savings in the future.

It should be noted: “relative to the private sector, the federal workforce is less than half the size it was back in the 1950s and 1960s”
http://fcw.com/Articles/2012/09/13/Size-federal-workforce.aspx?Page=2

Right on!

In the mid '70s when I was in grad school there was a discussion about whether education standards had been lowered and the general opinion was "yes". It was pointed out that the average grades in particular high school and university classes had been rising and that increasing numbers of freshmen were required to take make up courses in "language arts" as they couldn't write well. It was suggested that the proficiency level in the 2nd year of university corresponded to the proficiency level of high school graduates from 20 or 30 years before. One would think that the decline would have bottomed out by now; perhaps part of this perception of decline is just perception.

On the other hand this decline appears to be correlated with the "baby boomer" explosion and the introduction television in every household.

There must still be some records around of the required proficiency in written language skill from previous decades which could be compared with today's.

Example I notice today on Slashdot: ... which students are graded on ...
should be: ... on which students are graded ...

Red Dwarf? There's only one Red Dwarf; it needs a coat of paint and it is only seldom ever near an earth sized planet.