Page 2/The BattalionThursday, April 18, 1985
OPINION
" ,|1 I 11 ii.,.-,
■
III
GjP*
CTO30NIPN-®l l 5^WTBBNt WWSETW5-
„WE FREEZE,
DA?
Computers
Stuc
for \
.NN\\NVNNN\\\\N\VVWV\\NV\
Machines winning people ovILf
in plot to take over the worldf *
XvsCsV'n''NVvV\sns\\vn
I was going to write about the joys of
summer, but I can’t. The Battalion’s
computer system decided to take a holi
day and crash, with my column some
where in its bowels.
Univei
The Goodwill Gesture
o |
SEN. -AWE GARMS
6
SHUTOE
FW6HT LQ&
o
L
..LAUNCH, All SfStEMS
-EiftOT MV PI6ESWE-
AKE "go:
HIJHC CLOCK IS
QrtRKnNS..ER,
SENATOR 'ADD
iockhsLe...
So now I really want to talk about com
puters.
It’s amazing how much our puny lives
are at the mercy of these merciless crea
tures. Computers, even now, are plotting
our overthrow.
Oh, I know everyone chuckles at this
thought, but believe me, I’ve seen more
than enough movies to prove this theory
correct.
Colossus, HAL and other fiendish
computers throughout movie history
have had only two real objects, make
friends with the humans, then destroy
the ENTIRE UNIVERSE.
To a computer’s mind it is as simple a
step to destroy life as we know it, as to
create new computer languages.
At least that’s the gospel according to
Hollywood.
I like computers. They make neat
sounds, they’re quiet and they don’t talk
back.
And it would be pretty stupid to;; v
against this. Khe job tlu
But try making the damn thing injob evaluati
when it doesn’t want to —that’sikfbethe reason,
trick. Pleading, whining, vveapin»y study ind:
swearing may make you feel better,M
doesn’t convince the computer. Ipiis. Ben S
lood and gr
Think how this kind of “It’s myw Allei1 lount , ‘
the highway” attitude could t 2' ’pSo Vc
screwed up historical events. women, and t
ly hold, posse
Old Christopher Columbusi.aieristics tha
would have had his work cut outfor| co,1, . 1 ‘* Jut 5 to
if his Apple said there was insulin ' S * ia ' v * s ai
evidence to program lor navigation^, H Klte j )ro
ref used to start the engines (orra»Hj 0 b char a
sails for purists). eluded salary
of decision-m
The Charge of the Light Bng an( ' equipme
probably never would have gone far H ei '‘ | S01 ^ ( * u
than the office if computers had Jaracterisd
their way. Bperience, e
Imagine the l<K)ks on the faceso;:pei week, a:
officers when they get a look at prop; weeks woike
casualty figures flickering on their 111 1 hrough s
No way buddy. tyiresoi chan
What if all the leaders where ^
according to a computer program! basically val
they are four
the old Find Yourf!: > n traditiona
But I can’t shake the feeling that
something is going on behind my back.
Some might call it paranoia, but I call
it prudent caution.
Even now, on the older computer sys
tem I am typing this on, the dead compu
ter is chatting with this system.
Just slip in
Woman disk and type in the person! Women 1
plying. Using the computers cnten|| eS) „ said ;
have a feeling a couple of historid experience,
gures would never have cut it. preek and w
Napoleon Bonaparte too si
lacks second language skill and thinl;
too broad of terms. No leadership
I’m told it’s giving error messages to
this system. I guess misery, even for a
silicon chip, likes company.
But think how much we rely on these
machines for all our needs. T ry getting a
new' license from the DPS if their compu
ter is down. Or try and get your money
from a banking machine when it decides
to go AWOL.
It can’t be done.
Horatio Nelson prone to inju
subordinate, yells a lot.
Abraham L i n col n.... flowery l
guage, non-executive type dresser.il
idealistic. Can’t make the Porschep
ments, for sure.
We haven’t gotten to this pint yet,
I figure a lot of people are just wait
for the software to fit a non-BASIC
T hese machines make our life easier,
or so all the computer commercials insist.
Ed Cassa voy is a seniorjou
ism major and a weekly colum
for The Battalion.
r
R5VENC
U.S. is losing arms control battle
WASHINGTON — Believers in arms
control are undaunted by the evidence
of history. But they might suffer a doubt
about peace-through-parchment if they
turned their attention from Geneva to
the Ukrainian village of Ivanichi. There,
in Middle School 2, a young teacher re
cently died heroically when, to protect
his pupils, he absorbed the blast of a gre
nade.
What was a grenade doing in Middle
School 2? T he answer, reported by Iain
Elliot in the London Times, is relevant to
the coming argument about continued
compliance with SALT II.
The teacher, a graduate of a KGB bor
der-guard college (think about that), had
been delivering the military instruction
that is a compulsory part of the curricu
lum for Soviet children. He was teaching
how to handle what should have been an
unarmed grenade. When he pulled the
pin a wisp of smoke showed that a live
grenade had become mixed in with de
monstration grenades, and he gave his
life.
The children’s manual, which teaches
“hatred for the enemies of socialism,”
also teaches assembly of machine guns
and the use of bayonets and rifle butts in
the “decisive armed conflict of the two
opposing world systems,” a conflict that
will involve “vast casualties of an unpre
cedented scale.” As Elliot says, “T he sol
diers now carrying out orders and com
mitting atrocities in Afghanistan began
playing serious w'ar games with their first
steps in education.”
It is with representatives of this manic
militarism that U.S. officials are plan
ning to negotiate substantial reductions
of offensive strategic-force levels. T he
promise that such reductions would
come in SALT IT was what made SALT
I s high and unequal limits, and the ABM
Treaty, palatable to Gongress in 1972.
But, Soviet deployments of offensive sys
tems accelerated, as reasonable people
expected from a nation that teaches chil
dren to handle grenades.
The administration warns the public
not to have high expectations from the
Geneva talks, yet describes the talks as
the first step toward the abolition of nuc
lear weapons. In defense of such rhetor
ic Paul Nitze, the President’s special arms
control adviser, says that elimination of
nuclear weapons “is a long-term goal set
by the U.S.S.R.” 25 years ago.
Yes, it is old Soviet boilerplate and all
previous American administrations have
regarded it as empty propaganda. T his is
the first administration to define U.S.
objectives in terms of such a patently un
realizable goal.
The administration has not commit
ted itself to spurn an agreement that, like
SALT' I and SALT II, does not involve
substantial reductions. Indeed, such is
the administration’s hunger for even the
cosmetics of arms control, it may con
tinue to comply with SALT 11 limits even
after the end of the year, when that
agreement would have expired if it had
been ratified. It was never ratified, be
cause enough people joined candidate
Reagan in denouncing it.
Both sides have agreed not to “under
cut” SALT II. The Soviets are violating it
in many ways, so that the “no undercut”
policy is actually unilateral compliance.
SALT II limits both sides to 2,250 de
livery vehicles, and some other limiting
categories. T he Soviets were above 2,250
in 1979 and today have 2,568. We are in
compliance with the 2,250 limit but when
the new Trident submarine “Alaska” en
ters service we will stop being in com
pliance with the limit on MIRVed mis
siles — unless we scrap some land-based
IGBMs or, more likely, a Polaris sub
marine.
For us, scrap means reduce to scrap
metal. However, as the Soviets deploy
new systems, including some in violation
of SALT II, they retire some older sys
tems but do not destroy them. They put
them in storage, or turn ballistic-missile
submarines into cruise-missile sub
marines.
The Polaris is about at the end of its
useful life and it would he expensive to
replace the nuclear core. T hat fact is
being siezed upon by those who usually
rationalize American unilateralism.
But the case for keeping the Polaris in
service a while longer is larger than this
economic calculation. The credibility of
the president will be a casualty of con
tinued compliance with an agreement he
stingingly criticized. Furthermore, des
troying the Polaris might destroy the
MX. Some conservatives might stop vot
ing for a vulnerable land-based IGBM if
deployment of it requires destruction of
sea-based systems.
And, as the administration considers
twisting itself even more out of shape in
pursuit of arms control, it should consid
er that it is chasing a chimera: a useful
agreement with the people who put gre
nades in Middle School 2.
George Will is a columnist for
the Washington Post.
Right-wing zealots affect White House
By Art Buchwald
Los Angeles Times Syndicate
I knew Rotary wanted to be a federal
judge, but I didn’t know how badly until
I found him at his desk perspiring as he
filled out a questionnaire.
“Whats’s that?”
“It’s a series of questions I have to
answer correctly to satisfy the ultra-right
wing that I’m worthy of having a seat on
the bench.”
“Why are you trying to satisfy the
ultra-right?” 1 asked him.
“Because Ronald Reagan listens to
them when he decides who gets the fed
eral judgeships. A judicial candidate has
to swear he buys the whole conservative
ideology or he can’t get appointed depu
ty bail bondsman in a traffic court.”
“What kinds of questions are they
asking you?”
“They want to know’ how I’ll rule on
abortion.”
“You’re going to have to rule for it if
you want to be a federal judge. It’s the
law of the land.”
“It may be the law of the land, but the
ultras believe a federal judge has to
ignore the law if a fetus is at stake.”
“So what are you putting down?” I
asked him.
“Here’s what I wrote. ‘As a federal
judge I have no choice but to let my con
science take precedence over any Sup
reme court decision — so help me God.’
Do you think it’s strong enough?”
“The devil only knows what will satisfy
them. What else are they asking you?”
“Would I have any hesitation frying a
man in the electric chair?”
“That’s a good right-to-life question.
Would you?”
“Not if I could send him to the gas
chamber first. You see, I don’t want
them to think I’m partial to just one kind
of death penalty.”
“So far it sounds like you’re their kind
of guy.”
“Those are the easy ones. T hey also
want to know how I feel about prayers in
school.”
“That shouldn’t be hard. Say you’re
for them.”
“Of course I said I’m for them. But the
second part is multiple choice. Listen to
this. Tf you answered yes, tell when: (A)
in the morning (B) at lunchtime, (C) all
day long.”’
“I'd put down ‘G.’ just to play it safe,” I
told him.
“There’s no legal precedent for ‘C,’”
he said.
“There’s no legal precedent for asking
you all those other questions either.”
Rotary looked at the sheet. “Do I be
lieve everyone in America should own a
gun?”
“I should hope so. How else would the
good guys kill the bad guys in the sub
ways?”
“Where do I stand on the Equal Rights
Amendment?”
“Tell ’em right on top of Phyllis
Schlafly.”
“They want a list of all the political
groups I’ve donated money to in the last
10 years, the name of anyone in the
neighborhood who does not support
covert aid to Nicaragua, a list of mem
bers of my family who still believe in Dar
win’s theory of evolution and any bus
drivers I know who are actively involved
in school busing.”
“You know something?” I said. “After
listening to all this garbage I’ve decided
you demean yourself by answering a
questionnaire from a bunch of right-
wing kooks just to get a seat on the feder
al court.”
“Oh yeah?” he said. “They may be
kooks, but they also happen to be United
States senators. As far as the White
House is concerned, when it comes to
selecting judges, the right-wing zealot’s
word is law.”
The Battalion
USPS 045 360
Member of
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism Conference
The Battalion Editorial I
NEAL
WEEKNITES: 7:45-
1AT/BUN:
eekwites: rrao-t-.jo
THE
Ft E A KJjT
C_kLLS
THEK!
F 1E1
Brigid Brockman, Editor
Shelley Hoekstra, ManagingEditot
Kellie Dworaczyk, News Editor
Michelle Powe, Eeliti/rial Page Edito; |
Rhonda Snider, City Editor
Travis Tingle, Sports Editor
r
o
The Battalion Staff
Assistant City Editors IlTOMBOY (R)
Dainah Bullard, Kari Flirt'
Assistant News Editors ^POLICE ACAD
Cami Brown, John Hallett, Kay Mall
Edit
Assistant Sports Editor 4| NIGHTMARE <
Charean Wife;
Entertainment Editors
Shawn Behlen, Leigh-Ellen
Staff Writers Rebecca At
Cathie Anderson, MarcyBi
Tamara Bell, BrandonBer
] eff Brady, Ann Cervenk
Michael Crawford, Mary'
Kirsten Dietz, Cindy
Pete Herndon,TrentLeo|
Sarah Oates, Jerry
elm street
AMADEUS(PC
BEVERY HIH
(R)
Die last dr
June Pang,TriciaPadf
Cathy Riely, MarybethRolsf
M
>py 1
ake-
WalterSmC GIRLS JUST ’
TO HAVE FU
up Editors.
Karen Bl«‘
Karla Mai*
Columnists Ed Cassavoy, Kevin Ini
Loren $4
Editorial Cartoonist '. Mikeb*
Sports Cartoonist DaleS®!
Copy Writer CathyBenn^
Photo Editor KatherineHi'
Photographers AnthonyCasp< :
Wayne Grabein, Bill Hughes, Frank Ini
CATS EYE, (PC
ETURN OF
THE JEDI (PC
Editorial Policy
The Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting nm
operated as a community service to Texas Akft
Bryan-College Station.
Opinions expressed in The Battalion are thosed 1
Editorial Board or the author, and do not necessarilj
resent the opinions of Texas A&M administrators,
or the Board of Regents.
The Battalion also serves as a laboratory new
ry nernpai
students in reporting, editing and photograph)'
within the Department of Communications.
Letters Policy
Letters to the Editor should not exceed 300
length. 7 he editorial sta ff reserves the right to edit
for style and length but will make every effort to mi
the author's intent. Each letter must be signed and
include the address and telephone number of them 1
The Battalion is published Monday through
during Texas A&M regular semesters, except for ho^,
and examination periods. Mail subscriptions are ffi,
per semester, $33.25 per sc hool year and $35
year. Advertising rates f urnished on request.
The Battalion, 216 Reed McW*
Our add re
Building, Texas A&M University, College Siam
77B43. Editorial stall phone number: (409) 845-160
vertising: (409) 845-2611
Second class postage paid at College Station, TX
POSTMAS TER: Send address changes to TheW
ion, Texas A&-M University, College Station, ^
77843
a
: „ Th
: “atte
: SP]
; if
G3WH
,