Tuesday, September 1, 2015

Easy Tips for Buy Glasses Online Canada

Buying glasses online canada is a very simple process and it is an increasingly popular choice with people who are required to wear prescription glasses. This article will take you through the process of how to buy glasses online canada, as well as some of the issues you need to consider when making your purchase.


Fortunately, the process for buy glasses online canada is very easy and so do not need to worry about it - it is often easier than going directly to your optician. Plus, a provider of online glasses you will ensure there are clear instructions on the website for you, just in case you need assistance at any time during the process.

First of all, make sure you have copies of your eyesight prescription. This is important because you will need to enter details into the website before you buy glasses online. This is to ensure that the lenses are made to the exact specifications and to ensure that you only choose a frame that suits your needs.

Once you have all your details are sorted, you can browse through the frame to choose the people you love. Many glasses online retailers often have deals such as two for one offer, which is ideal if you are looking for cheap sunglasses - so if you see two frames that you like, chances are you will be able to get them both.

Once you have selected the frame you want to buy, just follow the instructions on the screen to make your purchase. It's worth taking your time to check you've inputted all your details correctly as this will mean there is less chance of there being a problem with your glasses.

Write down your order number and other relevant details after you make your purchase - then all you need to do is wait for the glasses to arrive. If you choose to buy glasses online, it's pretty much all there is to it.

What to Consider

There are several things to consider when you buy glasses online. For example, before you buy anything, check the return policy of the provider you use. This is important because you might need to know about it in case there is a problem with glasses or you decide you want to change them.

Also see information relating to a guarantee, as this will make sure you have enough to cover your glass should you need it. Also, if you are looking for cheap sunglasses, not just choose glasses that cost little, you need to make sure that they offer the best value for money. This means making sure that you get the right frame and lens for your needs - depending on your recipe, this could have an impact on how much you need to pay.

Besides this, you can only choose your glasses and enjoy the benefit of the flexibility of the Internet. One reason many people buy glasses online is that they can do it whenever they like in the comfort of their own home. This flexibility plus the simplicity of the process means that it is a very good choice for anyone who wears glasses.

Wednesday, July 18, 2012

Getting Your App Ready for Jelly Bean and Nexus 7

[This post is by Nick Butcher, an Android engineer who notices small imperfections, and they annoy him.]

We are pleased to announce that the full SDK for Android 4.1 is now available to developers and can be downloaded through your SDK Manager. You can now develop and publish applications against API level 16 using new Jelly Bean APIs. We are also releasing SDK Tools revision 20.0.1 and NDK revision 8b containing bug fixes only.

For many people, their first taste of Jelly Bean will be on the beautiful Nexus 7. While most applications will run just fine on Nexus 7, who wants their app to be just fine? Here are some tips for optimizing your application to make the most of this device.


Giving Nexus 7 its name, is the glorious 7” screen. As developers we see this as around 600 * 960 density independent pixels and a density of tvdpi. As Dianne Hackborn has elaborated, this density might be a surprise to you but don’t panic! We actively discourage you from rushing out and creating new assets at this density; Android will scale your existing assets for you. In fact the entire Jelly Bean OS contains only a single tvdpi asset, the remainder are scaled down from hdpi assets.

To be sure the system can successfully scale your hdpi assets for tvdpi, take special care that your 9-patch images are created correctly so that they can be scaled down effectively:

  • Make sure that any stretchable regions are at least 2x2 pixels in size, else they risk disappearing when scaled down.

  • Give one pixel of extra safe space in the graphics before and after stretchable regions else interpolation during scaling may cause the color at the boundaries to change.

The 7” form factor gives you more space to present your content. You can use the sw600dp resource qualifier to provide alternative layouts for this size screen. For example your application may contain a layout for your launch activity:

To take advantage of the extra space on the 7” screen you might provide an alternative layout:

The sw600dp qualifier declares that these resources are for devices that have a screen with at least 600dp available on its smallest side.

Furthermore you might even provide a different layout for 10” tablets:

This technique allows a single application to use defined switching points to respond to a device’s configuration and present an optimized layout of your content.

Similarly if you find that your phone layout works well on a 7” screen but requires slightly larger font or image sizes then you can use a single layout but specify alternative sizes in dimensions files. For example res/values/dimens.xml may contain a font size dimension:

<dimen name="text_size">18sp</dimen>
but you can specify an alternative text size for 7” tablets in res/values-sw600dp/dimens.xml:

<dimen name="text_size">32sp</dimen>

Nexus 7 has different hardware features from most phones:

  • No telephony

  • A single front facing camera (apps requiring the android.hardware.camera feature will not be available on Nexus 7)

Be aware of which system features that you declare (or imply) are required to run your application or the Play Store will not make your application available to Nexus 7 users. Always declare hardware features that aren't critical to your app as required="false" then detect at runtime if the feature is present and progressively enhance functionality. For example if your app can use the camera but it isn’t essential to its operation, you would declare it with:

<uses-feature android:name="android.hardware.camera" 

For more details follow Reto Meier’s Five Steps to Hardware Happiness.


Nexus 7 ships with Jelly Bean and its updated suite of system apps are built to take advantage of new Jelly Bean APIs. These apps are the standard against which your application will be judged — make sure that you’re keeping up!

If your application shows notifications then consider utilizing the new richer notification styles. If you are displaying immersive content then control the appearance of the system UI. If you are still using the options menu then move to the Action Bar pattern.

A lot of work has gone into making Jelly Bean buttery smooth; make sure your app is as well. If you haven’t yet opted in to hardware accelerated rendering then now is the time to implement and test this.

For more information on Android 4.1 visit the Android Developers site or join us Live.

Join the discussion on +Android Developers

Tuesday, July 10, 2012

The Ron Paul Spirit: Why I Love This Man And What Each Of Us Can Learn From Him

The coming election is one of the most important elections in America's history. We owe it to ourselves to look beyond the shallow reality which appears on our TV screens in the form of words and promises. Words alone are hollow, as we have been finding out time and again when we look at the political reality playing out in our daily lives. There is hope though if we care to look what's hidden beneath the obvious surface.

Because deep in the trenches of life's struggles, paradoxes, hopes and despairs there is a truth, which I would like to call the real truth of the Ron Paul Spirit.

When one observes Ron Paul one cannot help but notice the immense charisma, the inner strength and integrity that way surpasses his message. Whether or not Ron Paul becomes president, he understands the importance of "being" first and foremost. He knows that reality follows what we are and not what we want to be.

Ron Paul has been steadfast for 30 years in his core message, his core being and yet been honest enough and flexible enough to grow with his message and make honest adjustments as required.

Ron Paul knows that life is about the embodiment of truth which honours the human spirit, is non judgemental and thus expansive and in line with the evolutionary process all of life.

Ron Paul knows about the art of surrendering to what is and letting it be okay. He does not do this as a result of deliberation, but from the core of his inner being. This is his enormous power. People all over America and probably all over the world, (I am in the UK and an avid Ron Paul supporter), are beginning to feel it, if they are open to receiving it.

This is the power we all have, and many are beginning to recognise it, even if they are unable to articulate it such. Truth, the deep truth our soul knows, the truth which derives from the core of our being, is way more powerful than anything else could possibly be. In its awakening resides true, joy, happiness, fulfillment and ultimately success.

I have chosen to spend countless hours writing about the subject of authentic truth from many angles, trusting that some of you will get it. And I mean truly get it. Its like price momentum on a chart: You watch and see momentum grow. At some point you can feel that it only takes one or two more contracts and direction changes...

It is up to you and me to chose to expand and finally re-unite ourselves with the truth of who we are. We can chose to be swept along with the collective consciousness or to help shape it.

Ron Paul is a wonderful teacher to all of us. Thank you Ron Paul for being here in this time and reminding us of who we truly are!

Ron Paul: Why So Many Conservatives Hate Him

On February 12, 2011, Ron Paul won the annual CPAC straw poll for a second time. The announcement was met with a mixture of cheers and boos. The veteran congressman from Texas has been in the national public debate for quite some time now. Known for his beliefs in small government, opposition to the Federal Reserve, and elimination of the federal income tax and the IRS, he stood out as different from the rest during the 2008 Republican primary. As the only anti-war candidate on stage at these debates, he was the only candidate that I can remember who actually elicited jeers from some of the crowd after speaking.

Even I have to admit that I find Ron Paul interesting and appealing. His supporters are passionate, vocal, and are willing to speak with their wallets. During the last Presidential election season, I found it interesting that even at some of the most liberal universities in the country, you could see students holding his signs and advertising his cause with the same fervor as their liberal counterparts would hold their "Obama" signs. The "Ron Paul Revolution" signs where everywhere! What makes Ron Paul so interesting? What makes him interesting is also what makes many mainstream conservatives hate him.

First, Ron Paul is strictly anti-war. He has an "isolationist" philosophy that believes that the United States should choose to not intervene in world issues that do not directly affect our country. He was an outspoken critic of the war in Iraq, as well as the war in Afghanistan. To this day, he is trying to end the war in Afghanistan, an idea that is much more popular now than it has ever been before.

His opposition to war appears at times to be more about the costs of war and less about the human toll or the rights of other nations, but this should not be a surprise to anyone. Ron Paul is if nothing else one of the most fiscally conservative modern politicians. All wars result in borrowing money from other nations for funding, and Congressman Paul has stood firm in his opposition to adding to the national debt to fight wars. Clearly, any neo-con who likes war and "spreading democracy" as part of their platform would abhor Mr. Paul.

Another reason why Ron Paul is so disliked by some conservatives is because of his stance on social issues. While he is strongly pro-life and in favor of overturning Roe v. Wade, he has repeatedly stated that he believes the federal government should be out of the abortion issue. "We don't need a federal abortion police," Paul once said. It is clear the Paul does not support a federal ban on abortion, which could anger many of the strongest supporters of the rights of the unborn.

Due to his anti-federalism philosophy, Congressman Paul believes that marriage is a religious institution and that the federal government should not dictate who marries who. He has repeatedly said he would not support a Constitutional amendment that would define marriage as between one man and one woman. This has angered many of the religious right, as well as other social conservatives, who believe the federal government should step in to "protect traditional marriage." This issue could be one of the major ones that will continue to prevent Paul from being a serious 2012 presidential candidate.

Ron Paul also wants to do away with the "War on Drugs." He claims that this has been a costly government bureaucracy that has only served to increase crime, and not prevent it. Part of this seems to be his libertarian streak, where people should be allowed to do what they wish with their bodies, so long as it is not hurting anyone else. But when you look a little deeper, it's easy to see Paul's fiscal conservatism shining through. He looks at the War on Drugs as another wasteful and massive government spending program. He sees that it puts some non-violent offenders into the jail and prison systems, where taxpayers have to fund their housing and basic needs. This issue has angered many conservatives that I know personally, who feel that we need even stricter penalties for those who use and sell illicit drugs.

While certainly not the last issue that offends many conservatives, Ron Paul has repeatedly defended the earmark process, saying that it leads to more transparency in fund allocation and ultimately less federal government intervention. Both Republicans and Democrats alike have been critical of earmarks in the news lately. Earmarks, at times, seemed to be the main issue of John McCain's failed 2008 Presidential run. Paul's insistence that earmark elimination would not save any money has aggravated those on the left and the right. ( http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/earmark-reform/ )

Ron Paul will continue to be a divisive figure within the Republican Party for a long time to come. But even his harshest of critics should recognize that he has been pivotal in increasing the awareness for the need of national discussion on the issues of taxes, trade, and the wastes of the federal government. There is little doubt that Paul will once again run for President in 2012, and while I may never claim to cast my support, I more than look forward to hearing his dissenting voice at the Republican primary debates.

Source of information: http://www.ronpaul.com

Is America Ready For A Ron Paul Presidency?

I figure Ron Paul supporters must feel pretty low these past few days. The attention Paul enjoyed on network news after the first debate in South Carolina was stupendous but for the past few weeks, Ron Paul seems to be a ghost on the news channels. This made me wonder why. Why was mainstream media so obviously ignoring this potential candidate? Could it be that Paul's radical message is a bit too far off the reservation to be taken seriously?

After President Obama gave the order to raid a sovereign nation and kill a known enemy of the state, Ron Paul said that he would not have issued the kill order on Bin Laden. That's right, if Ron Paul were president at the time, Bin Laden would still be alive. Now a statement like that can ruin a guy's chances to get nominated if not tarred and feathered by Rush Limbaugh himself.

Never mind that invading a sovereign nation and starting a firefight means breaking a few important international laws and is pretty much an act of war against the people and government of Pakistan. Never mind that the international community sees us as imperialists who feel we can do anything we want to anyone we want anywhere we want.

Never mind that capturing Bin Laden alive and trying him in court is the only honest American thing to do. Never mind that killing Bin Laden is a magnificent waste of intelligence information that may have saved countless American lives.

You see, there is a beautiful and true logic behind Ron Paul's policies. Going in to kill Bin Laden was a terrible waste of resources. What good is he to us dead? Oh sure we get to celebrate, dance in the streets and act like hyenas but that has put a serious strain on our already tumultuous relationship with Pakistan while telling the world that sovereignty means absolutely nothing to us.

Imagine a few Chinese military helicopters circling your neighborhood and finally hovering above one of your neighbor's houses. Imagine black-garbed storm troopers zipping down from those helicopters to engage in a firefight with whoever is inside. It's a kill mission so just go in blazing. The point is, America would want someone's head on a platter if such an infraction on our sovereignty were committed. There would be no acceptable excuse or reason for it.

Mainstream media loves to take these wacky sounding statements from Ron Paul because they hurt his chances to be president if they do not allow him to fully explain the logic behind his statements. My thought is that if Ron Paul really wants to be nominated, he better keep those radical statements to himself until he can put them out there with a full explanation of it.

The trouble is, Ron Paul is just too honest a man to even hide the truth or his feelings even if it means throwing himself into the fire. When asked questions, he will answer them with honesty and truth in his heart. He will not refuse to answer until his political advisors can give him an answer to spew forth like all the other candidates do. He will give you his opinion when you ask it and if that's not good enough, then so be it.

Maybe America isn't ready for a Ron Paul presidency but it sure would be nice to feel like our leader was honest and brave enough to tell us how things are for a change. Who knows what we could accomplish with a president that didn't treat us like a foe, or worse yet, children. It would be nice if our President felt as if he were a part of our American community rather than ruler of it. I think America is actually in dire need of a leader like that.

The Reformed American Political Theory: A Government By and For the People

It is fast becoming clear that the American government will never truly serve the interests of the population, will never seek, first and foremost, to act for the common good, without a thorough overhaul and reform of the entire political system. Previously noted was the first step towards this reform: the removal of financial interests from elections and from the influence they wield in the operation of the two political parties. But this is far from being the only step necessary.

The next requirement involves a reformation of the current state of government contracts. In a word, the first step must be followed by further removal of the influence of money, but now it must be done in the actual operation of the political system. Complete transparency is necessary in this regard, for if financial influence is removed from elections it will surely attempt to maintain its grasp on the day-to-day operations of the government. Decades of privatization of virtually every aspect of government function--private prisons, private defense contractors, even private mercenary contractors--has caused the step-by-step privatization of the government as a whole, further alienating the voice and interests of the people.

Today, this voice can hardly be heard, as it is drowned out by the cries for ever-expanding private profit potential. As things currently stand in this respect, money has a direct and immediate effect on the decision-making of legislators: the awarding of government contracts can mean more money in politicians' campaign coffers and lucrative job offers in the private sector, so legislators must weigh their options and do what is in the best interest of either their constituents, as is their duty, or private corporate interests and the financial gain that comes with them. For a return to the ideals that formed the building blocks for such a great nation, there must be complete transparency in government and elimination of private profit interests in its functioning; as long as there exists the opportunity for politicians to succumb to greed in their official duties, there likewise will exist a chink in the chain of liberty and justice in the American government. The pursuit of greed to the detriment of others is universally considered to be fundamentally wrong and immoral, as is taking the life of another man. Few would argue that it is unthinkable to tell a known murderer the combination to the gun safe or where the spare key is hidden; but far, far fewer know anything of the back-door deals among politicians, corporate executives, and the lobbyist middle-men, frequently falling into the legal gray area and always involving taxpayer money. It matters not what a given deal is meant to accomplish: the populace is left in the dark in virtually every instance of this sort. Any and all take part in these deals as a result of greed. If the general will is not involved in such decision-making, doesn't even know that there is a decision being made, then according to the line of logic (it would be near-impossible to find a politician that is innocent of such behavior), there are now two universal truths:

1) politicians (especially the most powerful) have constant opportunities to succumb to greed in their official duties, and,

2) these politicians will allow their constituents, whom they serve, to suffer--or perhaps the politician will forego a chance to really help them--if it means that they themselves might benefit considerably.

The cardinal sin for a politician in a representative democracy is to fail to act on behalf of the general will. The founding fathers chose to design the government in the hopes that it would best represent all of the individual and differing voices across this diverse country while keeping it as straight-forward as possible. It is not an opinion, but rather a fact that those same men would be the staunchest opponents to the government as it functions today. Despite the profound evolution that capitalism has incurred, largely instigated and guided by America and now reaching all corners of the earth, the world is constantly changing. What was best for progress in the 18th century is assumed to be best for progress today only by the ignorant fool. The explosion of capitalism, for example, coincided with the relatively new inhabitants of North America slaughtering entire cultures native to the continent and having survived thousands of years. Today, the reach of capitalism can be found almost anywhere in the world where a human being can physically be; and comparatively, Americans are so thoroughly concerned with treating those very cultures that their ancestors destroyed with dignity and respect that high school and college sports teams' names and mascots are no longer allowed to reference Native Americans or their cultures in any way: countless schools with mascots such as The Indians, The Tribe, The Braves, and so on have been forced to change their names, and often rich heritage, over a matter of political correctness that the majority of people really do not care about. It is impossible to imagine America having gone through any more profound of a change than she has in less than 250 years of existence. And throughout this time, America has played the single-most important role in the liberation of the downtrodden, whether living under tyranny, corruption, or criminal-like oppression in general. Why, then, have there been so few calls for the liberation of Americans from the corporate- and financial elite-controlled government? It matters not that citizens of the United States are already as free and enjoy as much liberty as any other populace in the world. The creation of this nation was perhaps the most profound act against the status quo that has occurred throughout history, and fast-approaching is an opportunity for America to do so once again. If America had not won independence, would the status quo today still be monarchy, tyranny, slavery, and what we now consider to be criminal treatment of citizens?

The possibility exists, even though what has come to be known as the 'American way' would never allow for it; should, then, America sit back on her laurels and protect the vast wealth of the elite to the detriment of the many? A crossroads is approaching, and the treatment of the previously noted fault and injustice of the American government could very well decide the legacy of the USA: will it be remembered as a flash-in-the-pan superpower so resistant to change that it was surpassed by the ever-expanding China, India, or even Russia? Or will America make the considerable changes necessary in order to ensure that the history of the nation thus far will be viewed in retrospect as the early years of a long, altruistic, and revered reign as the role model for the rest of the world? Part of the American identity assumes the latter premise as inevitable, and thus the single-most significant obstacle to the proposed reformation is this deep-seeded sense of entitlement present across the country in epidemic proportions. The notion that the status quo must be upended has been thoroughly exhausted, but the other side of the process involves attacking the widespread belief that all of the rights and liberties enjoyed by Americans are a birthright; just as the founding fathers and early settlers fought and sacrificed for their beliefs and freedom, so must everyone who sees the unrealized potential of this nation today.

Once the complete removal of financial influence on all levels of the political system is complete, it becomes necessary to further reform the government in order to solidify service to the general will as its primary function. A heavily progressive system of taxation, which requires the most wealthy to pay the highest percentage of taxes, will be enacted in a manner that prevents them from using exemptions and other loopholes to minimize what they ultimately pay. Corporations, which are currently able to use the existing loopholes and their influence on government to escape huge portions of their base-line tax requirements, will all be required to pay a certain percentage and face devastating consequences in cases of hiding profits or other creative accounting procedures that presently fall within the gray area of the law. The system of taxation, as it stands today, favors growing disparity in the distribution of wealth. For the bottom three-quarters of income earners, though the percentage required of them is lower than that of the top 10% of earners, there is no escape from or avoidance of their taxpayer duties. But for the highest bracket of earners, especially the top 1%, and likewise for the biggest corporations, creative accounting employs a multitude of methods to avoid paying that which the system 'requires' of them. This reality does not serve the general will or well-being, but rather the factional interests of the financial elite, and, in effect, limits upward social mobility--the 'American Dream'. The rich remain rich because 1) they are able to skirt around sizable portions of their tax duties; and 2) they have firm hold on the ear and the wallets of politicians and legislative authorities and bodies: if, out of the 100 wealthiest Americans, only the odd-numbered enjoy influence over the government, no difference is made. What is good for the top 1% is universal as far as their wealth is concerned; and as the only incentive for the financial elite to exercise their expensive influence is to either protect or increase their wealth, they are able to remain united in their pursuits, thus strengthening their position and maximizing their influence. The elite power structure--the rich, the wealthy, the well-connected--ensure that it is in the best interest of these politicians whom they can influence to keep the system of taxation unchanged. And so the lower and middle economic classes are up against this behemoth of a power structure, shedding light on why class struggle of this sort is found in every country with a McDonald's.

The concept of Liberty put forth in the Declaration of Independence refers to a state of freedom for all of man; a prudent definition of this concept, promised to all who enter into the American social contract, describes liberty as "freedom from arbitrary or despotic control". How, then, can concerned parties interpret the socially stifling financial influence on the political system as anything if not a violation of the populace's liberty? Rousseau's seminal work, Of the Social Contract, describes the relationship of a people with the power that their social contract creates in accordance with that which the founding fathers intended for the United States (indeed, Rousseau's influence on the creation of America was considerable). Rousseau explains that the social pact is the source of the body politic's power over all who enter into the pact; and this power, which is directed by the general will, can only legitimately function on behalf of the general will. So because, for Rousseau and the founding fathers, the general will always tends towards public utility, always favors all citizens equally, every legitimate act of the given political system's supreme power is therefore an act of the general will.

Thorough analysis has shown, however, that the American government does not act on behalf of the general will unless it is also in accordance with the factional financial interests that plague the power structure. But for Rousseau, the separate interests cannot coexist, for once a factional interest acquires power, which in this case it certainly has, "... there no longer is a general will, and the opinion which dominates is only a private opinion." The government of the United States of America is no longer legitimate, and it is up to the general will to recognize this fact and take quick, decisive, and all-encompassing action in order to regain legitimacy and utility. The power of the body politic, only present due to the people that make it up, is likewise present for the people to either reform or destroy it.

The government of the United States of America is no longer legitimate, and it is up to the general will to recognize this fact and take quick, decisive, and all-encompassing action in order to regain legitimacy and utility. The power of the body politic, only present due to the people that make it up, is likewise present for the people to either reform or destroy it.

US And UK Prepare Drones for Homeland Invasions

Drones are dropping from theskies like ducks on opening day just as the U.S. and the U.K. are preparing to approve the mass invasions of their homeland skies. Large unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) are crashing to the ground nearly every month. Smaller UAVs are crashing almost every day so it's almost impossible to keep records on their mishaps. The pilotless and sightless birds will present a dire threat to commercial and private aircraft and to life on the ground. The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) in the U.K. and the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) in the U.S. seem oblivious to the danger as they move ever closer to approving the invasions.

On August 24th three large drones hit the decks in a single week with two of them landing in highly populated areas.

On August 15th an RQ-7 Shadow drone collided with a U.S. Air Force C-130 cargo plane as it was flying near eastern Afghanistan. No one was injured in the crash as the C-130 was able to successfully land after the crash. In this case the manned aircraft overtook the RQ-7 while it was in a holding pattern. Just four days after the midair collision an unknown drone crashed in the capital city of Mogadishu in Somalia. It is suspected that the drone was operated by the U.S. military. No word was published on whether people were injured on the ground. The same press report indicated that the Somali government had confirmed five crashes in the same 24 hour period.

On August 20th a third drone crashed into a residential neighborhood near Jalalabad, Afghanistan. The drone was operated by NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). There were no reported injuries on the ground.

On August 25, 2011 an American drone dropped out of the sky near Chaman town in Baluchistan, Pakistan. The crash caused no damage according to a security official at the site. The UAV was said to have crashed due to a "technical fault."

Disarmingman, writing for globalresearch.ca, claims that there were 36 (now 37) large drone crashes between 2010 and 2011; and nearly 80 since 2007. He tracks them and provides links to the press reports for all of them.

Up to now unmanned aerial vehicles have been restricted to temporary compartmentalized airspace, but many of the approved airspaces are in close proximity to civilian and military airports where the dangers of catastrophic collisions are more likely than in isolated areas. Current 'sense and avoid' technologies used in piloted aircraft are not suitable for UAVs. The wide range of sizes, speeds and maneuverability make the design of a universal 'sense and avoid' system for UAVs extremely difficult. Many small manned aircraft do not use transponders. They operate using visual sight rules eliminating the 'sense and avoid' technologies used in larger commercial aircraft. Video data does not provide enough distance information for unmanned aerial systems to effectively avoid collisions. MITRE is researching a combination of radar and electro-optical elements in their efforts to come up with a suitable 'sense and avoid' solution. Testing is being done using radio-controlled aircraft but even that testing has proven to be dangerous.

On August 14th a biplane collided with a 46% giant-scaled radio-controlled plane being flown at a small Brighton Colorado airport. The pilot of the biplane probably didn't hear the tower's instructions to flyby when it flew directly into the radio-controlled plane as it was hovering in midair above the runway. By the time the pilot saw the large model airplane it was too late for him to avoid it. The pilot landed his biplane safely and, fortunately, no one was hurt in the incident. The owner of the radio-controlled plane was morbidly shaken as he surveyed the fragments of his $8,000 model. The pilot was thanking God that he was still alive. He will probably be leading the campaign to stop drone use in homeland skies.

Sleepless drones have no doubt been flying our homeland borders for years. Their value as vigilant eyes protecting our borders is not in question here. Drones flying the crowded skies near our airports threaten the lives of all who fly... whether in commercial or in private aircraft. The odds are against us in heavily trafficked skies - even with futuristic and elaborate 'sense and avoid' systems. The odds of major disasters with hundreds of casualties due to "technical faults" and human error are greatly increased when we add much smaller, barely visible UAVs. Once the sleepless and pilotless birds are allowed to nest the proliferation will begin. Companies are already testing communication systems to use them in swarms like killer bees performing a shared mission. A former U.S. Navy pilot has already developed an iPhone application to control drones.

Mary "Missy" Cummings, an MIT aerospace and systems engineer who once flew F-18 Hornets claims her application can teach any smart phone user "how to fly an unmanned aerial system in just three minutes."

Flocks of drones will soon be seen flying over our cities guided by law enforcement officers watching our every move; guided perhaps by terrorists who have armed their drones with fatal airborne diseases or poisons to drop in the lakes that supply our drinking water; or guided by carefree smart phone users who think they can control their expensive new toys as they maneuver them into the flight paths of unsuspecting private or commercial pilots.

The frightening nightmare will soon be zooming into the reality of our daily lives.

Ronald Czarnecki hosts the popular "Sleepless and Tired" blog at: http://sleeplessandtired.com. Frequent topics of discussion are sleep, sleep deprivation, and the mattress-buying process.

Other favorite topics include: drones, UAVs, pilot fatigue, politics and current newsworthy events.

Your conversation and opinions are always welcomed.