“Liftoff of space shuttle Discovery, beginning America’s new journey to the moon, Mars and beyond.”

Welcome back to space, guys. I took a break out of my workday to head over to the bookstore and watch the launch on their large TV. I can’t help it — space exploration is just so exciting, so romantic to me. I love that we continue to push the boundaries of our knowledge and reach for the stars; in this case, I mean this quite literally. I think that a launch is a very visceral, very tangible symbol of our human nature — our desire to reach out, explore, learn more about ourselves and our universe, both despite and because of the risks. We do this all the time in the sciences and the arts. But few breakthroughs are as visually stunning and emotionally swelling as a fire-charged escape from our planet’s gravity, a quite literal release from the traditions that we once thought were impenetrable. Our explorers are our future, and I hope to be one in my own field some day.

Tiger rocks.

I was walking to lunch today when I happened to glance into the campus store. The big screen was projecting CNN’s coverage of the first half of Scaled Composite’s attempt to win the X-Prize. I walked in just as they launched the rocket and stared, glued to the screen with my jaw hanging down, until they safely landed it. Did anyone else’s heart stop when the rocket started to roll? They’re scheduled to make their second flight in six days, which — if successful — will make them the official prize winning team. Unbelievable. In less than fifty years, achieving suborbital flight has gone from being too financially and intellectually expensive for any entity but national governments, to being doable by a number of small teams working with just a fistful of cash.

When we were kids, the resounding message sent by the media (somewhat ironically, perhaps) was that “television is evil.” There were frequent reports about television viewing leading to poor eyesight, lower intelligence, shorter attention span, increased weight, risky sexual activity, violence, and most other sociomoral (is that a word?) vices. Despite this, Americans continued to watch television, and more of it, as programming became increasingly salacious and hedonistic. We are still being told that television is bad. I don’t know if any of the given reasons is true, but I do know that TV is not inherently bad in itself.

The problem is that television watching is nearly always physically passive while being mentally stimulating. No, perhaps it’s not very enlightening to watch that episode of Seinfeld for the tenth time, but the images and sound coming out of the box are all stimulating your senses in the biological sense. And you will continue to be stimulated, whether you are watching that Seinfeld episode, the commercials that are interspersed throughout the show, or whatever it is that might come next. In fact, even if you don’t particularly like what you’re watching, you’ll probably still watch. And therein lies the danger, at least for me.

It’s hard to resist the promise of neverending stimulation like that. Suppose you’re sitting on your living room couch, with no great urge to do anything in particular. You could stare off into space, literally doing nothing; you could pick up a book and put forth the effort to understand what you read; you could see if someone else is around and start a conversation, if you have anything in particular to say; or you can push the power button on the remote. The activity that requires the absolute least effort — doing nothing — is terribly boring, and the passage of time is painfully obvious in most cases. But turning on the TV involves barely any additional work, and the reward is a bright moving picture show that rewards you for just sitting there. What’s better is that it never ends. You don’t have to turn a single page, think of something to say, or think of anything at all. There’s really nothing wrong with passive entertainment like that, and there are times when it is both appropriate and necessary to relax in this manner. In my experience, however, I am unable to turn away when it’s time to stop. The half-hour show ends, and before I know it I’m halfway through something I would never choose to watch on my own.

Random web surfing has the same effect, only it’s potentially more dangerous; after all, the medium — my computer — happens to also be a ubiquitous tool in almost every aspect of my life. Whereas the television is objectively about as important to me when it’s off as when it’s on, I need my computer for a good portion of the week. And when it’s on, it’s just ridiculously easy to check out CNN.com (for the tenth time), check my email (after a five-minute hiatus), or look up something marginally related to my work…and then get distracted by a different article I might find during my research.

What’s the solution? Have you ever heard of someone who successfully went cold turkey on anything and succeeded? It’s doable in the short term, but nearly impossible to do forever. People who swear off carbs, fats, or sweets might be able to do it for a week. But if you have a problem with eating too much of a certain food, it’s probably because you enjoy it. How easy can it be to deny yourself — forever — something that you like? This is why going cold turkey is so difficult, and why it takes more than a vague desire to “be better” to fix it — you have to actively dislike what you liked. It’s not easy, and it’s even harder when you’re dealing with something addictive like cigarettes.

Anyway, the more feasible solution is to cut back. When the activity is not particularly harmful, it’s fine to indulge now and then; as a matter of fact, it’s probably beneficial to “waste time” for part of the day. I’m learning to stay away from the Safari icon and the remote until I’m done reading for class. When it comes to boring projects, the web is never more than a click away…and I still get burned from time to time. I can usually get by if I promise myself some time to waste as soon as I’m done. The key, for me at least, is to follow through on that promise. If I can’t keep my own promises, how will I ever follow through with anyone else?

Speaking of school, I’ve got to get caught up for tomorrow. I have some thoughts about the semester so far, but I’ll expound on a later date.

The cicadas have arrived.

Kim noticed a cicada nymph climbing our front wall at around 11:30 last night. I went out and saw three more, one of which was just an empty shell. After going back inside to grab my camera, Kim and I stood outside for about an hour while we watched them break out of their exoskeletons. I took a number of photos, but the best one may be found by clicking here.

Watching the little guy do this thing was riveting. It’s mind-blowing to think that this kind of behavior is the result of millions of years of random genetic mutations. I’m no biology nerd, but I was awestruck as I saw the adult cicada emerge with its wrinkled and folded wings, stop to rest as its body started to harden and those wings started to unfurl, then continue on with its transformation. It’s just so cool.

This morning, I saw two adult cicadas just sitting on a path, probably in the last stages of hardening. They were the appropriate color and their wings looked to be fully dry, but I didn’t want to touch them just in case. I suspect we’ll be hearing their mating call very shortly.

Heard over IM, after immersing myself in nostalgia over Nintendo’s ground-breaking Game & Watch devices:

me: omg i havent seen one of those in YEARS

kim: wtf is that

kim: looks junky

kim: hahahhaha

me: junky?!

me: the controllers stow away in a hatch in the game

me: cripes

me: this is the dawn of the new console/handheld era, and you sit there calling it “junky”

me: there would be no game boy if it weren’t for these guys

kim: junky!

me: BAH

kim: junky mcclunky!

Time to step on my soapbox for a bit and flex my argumentative muscle. Terri Schiavo should be allowed to die. But wait, there’s more. I see two major lessons that the world should learn from the whole sad episode: Living wills are very important, and euthanasia must become legal.

The media is very happy to go about showing footage of Terri reacting to a balloon placed in front of her, or to the presence of her mother. What the media doesn’t show is the rest of the hours-long reels of footage that might be on the same videotape: Terri doing absolutely nothing. Terri NOT responding to repeated stimuli, from a balloon, human, or anything else. It makes sense; footage of a nonresponsive person is very boring and won’t make headlines. But it is a disservice to the case to suggest that she is somehow conscious or even mentally functional beyond breathing. From what I have read, she is not. She can breathe on her own, but that’s about it. You can clap your hands in front of her 1000 times, and she may blink or twitch her eyes once. That is not consciousness, and the brain scans show essentially no mental capacity or activity. Most importantly, in the 13 years that she has been kept alive by a feeding tube, she has not once shown the ability to display her will or opinion. Even someone who does not consider her to be hopeless must acquiesce this very evident fact.

Because she is unable to exert her own will, it must be expressed by proxy from some party. In her case, it is arguable as to who holds that power. I believe it is her husband, as impersonable as he may be in interviews. As the person who probably spent the most time with her prior to her accident, and the person who swore legally and morally to care for her, he is in the best position to exert her will in the best way he can. Due to the lack of a signed document, he can only go by her spoken wishes. Those wishes are up for debate, but again, as her legal and ethical mate, he is the one person who can best represent her desires at this time.

Because of Mr. Schiavo’s imperfect character and story, there may be some debate as to who should decide his wife’s fate. This is a decision to be made by the family members and perhaps the court system in a civil case, but under NO circumstance should the governer intervene with the process! It is bewildering and offensive to me that the state legislature would put themselves on a higher plane of authority with respect to her life. I can’t understand the logic behind the bill, and I especially can’t believe that any governor would be so reactionary and needy of public approval that he would pull a stunt like this. It is only prolonging the pain for all parties involved and provides no real solution, even if the parents were somehow to “win” and assert their wish to keep her alive. That is a decision for the family and the courts, NOT for Governor Bush.

The sad truth is that there is no happy ending for this story, regardless of its outcome. Euthanasia is currently against the law, which means that Schiavo cannot be mercifully put to death. Instead, the only way to fulfill her alleged desire to be removed from life support is to pull out her feeding tube and let her die from the resulting starvation. It is a horrible way to die, even for a person who is no longer conscious and probably feels no pain. But there is no choice. I would rather have her wishes be fulfilled in this inhumane manner than have her kept alive against her wishes, which is arguably less humane. In a country where criminals are routinely put to death by lethal injection, and where our pets are often put to sleep when they are no longer able to lead comfortable and happy lives, we must let this woman starve. It is shameful, but it is shamefully right.

In order to avoid this kind of ethical and legal disaster in the future, euthanasia should be made legal. People should be allowed to choose to end their own lives, at least in situations where the alternative to death is a severely incapacitated, unfulfilling, uncomfortable life. More importantly, however, people should consider making public and official their wishes regarding life support. Perhaps a formal living will is too morbid or cumbersome for younger people to consider. But Terri Schiavo’s case makes clear to me that we should all be able to assert our opinions even when we can not actively do it ourselves. Most states let drivers mark themselves as organ donors on their licenses. Should it be just as easy to mark oneself as “DNR?” Would that have ended Schiavo’s life 13 years ago, rather than draw it out while her husband, her parents, and state lawmakers battle it out on CNN?

Grrr….overnight I recevied 114 emails, and over 100 of them have the Sobig virus attached. Email servers all over the world must be staggering.

Ah, Civilization III. I have been sucked - yet again - into one of Meier’s awesome machinations. Now THIS is why computers were invented!

From today’s Washington Post: Middle schoolers increasingly using IMs instead of the telephone.

I remember when I first discovered the telephone as a way to keep in touch with my friends. I was in a Magnet-style school of some kind from fourth grade through high school, so I never really had the advantage of living near my friends. Social interaction prior to becoming mobile (hello driver’s license!) was limited to time at school and time on the phone. Sure, we’d all go over to each others’ homes, but it was never as simple as just walking down the street and being back before dinner. To this day, I wonder if the social costs were justified by the higher-quality education. I always wanted to be more social, but I wonder if my introverted personality was the cause or the effect — nature or nurture?

Anyway, back to IMs. I was somewhat atypical of the normal kid in school…okay, I was a nerd. I got my first modem in 9th grade and it didn’t take very long for me to discover BBSs. Back then, realtime online conversations were difficult to find; there was no realtime connection between any of these silo bulletin boards. Hell, email was typically limited in scope to users of the BBS, unless your sysop was a subscriber to FIDOnet. Once you found a BBS with multiple modem lines, starting a conversation was relatively easy because the medium was relatively novel and people were very willing just to start up a conversation. Ah, the good old days…

In 10th grade I received my first “real” computer account on our high school’s MicroVAX. It had eight incoming 2400 bps lines, and it had an honest-to-goodness connection to the internet. At a blazing 9600 bps, it was pretty pokey if more than one person was trying to telnet out, but it worked. That’s when we all discovered the VMS PHONE utility, and it very quickly tied of all of the modem lines at night to the extent that our admins (teachers) had to limit or altogether eliminate PHONE access. One particularly driven friend of mine then created a mini-utility to mimic online conversations by sending emails with the text of the message in the subject; the VAX (running some archaic version of VMS) would alert any online user who received an email during his or her session with the sender’s username and the subject line of the email. I don’t know if that particular activity was ever discovered, and it was clunky at best, but it kept us online and communicating anyway. How interesting; when it was just as easy (and often simpler) just to pick up the phone and call someone, why were we all competing for space on eight slow phone lines to type to each other online and risk getting caught in the process?

Well, for one, it was much easier to communicate that way for me. I’ve never been able to communicate as well in person as I have through written means, and PHONE allowed me to show people more than just my “quiet antisocial” side. Being online also maintained a sort of permanent presence; it was a lot like living next door to someone who was actually miles away. There was no phone set to pick up and no number to dial; if we were both online, PHONEing was as natural as walking up and talking to someone. And one very important feature of online communication was the privacy. I assume that parents today are well versed with Instant Messenger and email, but mine certainly weren’t. I was the only use to use the home computer. I was able to type things that I couldn’t dream of saying out loud on the phone, and by just being on the computer my parents usually thought that I was working.

Then I discovered MUDs/MUSHes/MUSEs/MOOs/etc. That dinky internet connection allowed me to connect realtime to other servers, where hundreds of people were gathered…at the same time, in realtime! Think of Ultima Online, Everquest, or The Sims Online, only text-based, free, and not always fantasy-based. It didn’t take long for me to get sucked into those worlds. I spent very little time on the “D&D” servers, although those seemed to be pervasive at the time. I was more interested in social interaction, and less in going on conquests to kill dragons. I was suddenly and finally able to talk to anyone there without trying to figure out the social cues and body language that were required to start a relationship in the real world. It was rather addictive, I must admit, but I somehow managed not to lose myself. And I think they played a pivotal role in my emotional growth. In fact, I believe internet/BBS access had a very significant and important role in my social development through high school.

Superficially, I believe I was very much the nerd’s nerd until abouth 10th grade. No sense of pop culture, little initiative to go out and meet people, not easy to speak to…the list goes on and on. Even in the Magnet program’s culture of nerdiness, I was one of the quiet ones in the corner. Anyone in that situation understands the difficulty in breaking out. And while I did end up on the phone for hours through the rest of high school, I don’t think I would have gotten to where I was by my senior year if I hadn’t been able to go online and chat with my school friends “under the radar.” I had no peers who lived near me, I had no siblings, and my parents were so out of touch with American culture that it hurt. Had I used the telephone for every online conversation, I would probably have gone deaf in my left ear a long time ago. And had I not been able to go online and “talk” to my friends, I would probably be as withdrawn from society as ever. Considering my current social situation, that is a truly sobering thought. I would have never screwed up the courage to talk to my future wife, I would have slogged through college without friends (a truly sad prospect…and I know it happens), and life would probably mean a lot less to me than it does now. I can’t say that going online had EVERYTHING to do with my relative success, but it was certainly a keystone in my social development. Ironically, doing all of these things — which were considered nerdy and not mainstream at the time — helped me to become a less withdrawn, less “nerdy” person.

When I read that middle schoolers are increasingly going online rather than using the phone, then, I can’t say that I’m surprised. It makes a lot of sense to me.