The draft before us makes no reference to anything real, except the buses, which are significantly only there to be hypothetically blown up by terrorism. All the other nouns refer to intangible legal concepts, or "transitional objects" like the "Israeli Supreme Court," which performs the function of mediating concepts, like "dignity" or "mother-rights" or whatever other Yecce bullshit we are into this week. Not a wire, not a chip, not an algorithm, a handset, a platform, a data-mining outcome, not an anything. Whatever legal thinking is—assuming for a moment that it exists or that we are compelled from politeness to pretend it does—it can only be strengthened by some integration into reality.

If I might make one suggestion about the revision of this draft, then, it would be to have some idea to put in it that is about the subject of our course. Not the constitutional theory we occasionally dropped into just in order that there should not be a wedding without musicians, but the more central matter of what we are making of ourselves and who that is turning us into. Not what the Yale professors thought about privacy at a symposium, but what is happening out there in the actual, where in the instantaneity of less than two generations, the human race is altering its fundamental nature. Some contact with these realities was the point of the course, and it would be valuable to have your thinking in relation to what we were studying together.