Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (July 9, 1997)
Wednesday - July 9, 1997 Fo boldly go where no one has gone before zthfinder, Mir lead future of space program endeavors deserving more respect in . hr since ed nr: d91 sn eft The Battalion T Chris Brooks Columnist, Senior physia major o y’all have the Hotwheels Mars Pathfinder toy?” I asked. “Is that from Mars Hacks?" the clerk said. | t If there were any doubts that the glory I tysofthe space program are over, this ould dispel them. Once upon a time, jttij| efirst moon landing glued people all :oss the world to their television sets, erhlowpeople only care how much money icspace program takes away from their IV1 rorite government subsidies. The space malt ceprovided the people of the world with B myluxuries and technological ad- tk inces that they would not have had oth- yyi wise. People need to appreciate the lace program for what it has done for thf[ m, and for what it will do. When the Eagle landed on the moon, mputers were the size of a room. To- iy,calculators are more advanced lanthose monstrous computers, amputer technology has moved for- ardatan amazing pace, largely due to sIuk demands of the space program. Necessity is the mother of invention, and Ivancement of the space program re lied improvements in computer technol- 5',The integrated circuit was developed ecause of NASA’s needs. Now, in an inter- itingswitch, the space progr am is benefit- ffrom the commercial advances in com- tertechnology that it initially spurred. While few will admit it, everyone used to have Velcro shoes. Velcro was developed for the space program along with those nifty thermal blankets that could keep a person warm on the North Pole. There have been advances in fuel technology, heat-resistant materials, global communication and medicine to name just a few, all because of mankind’s desire to reach the stars. Pathfinder has gone to Mars to fulfill mankind’s basic need to explore. It will also search for signs of life — signs that man is not alone in the universe. While it is there, its studies will help scientists to determine whether or not Earth is des tined to turn out like Mars, and by under standing Mars’ weather, scientists might be able to better understand our own. The future is even more dependent on the space program than the past. There are about 5 billion people on Earth right now. This number does not appear to be dropping. Cities are expanding into their rural surroundings; they are also growing into the sky. Eventually there will not be enough room for everyone, so people must wonder what can be done with all of those warm bodies. Since people dislike the idea of popula tion control, the only alternative is going to be shipping natives off the planet. Colonies on the moon and Mars have long been considered part of the future for mankind — if for no other reason than to do something with all of these people. There is another issue related to Earth’s rapid population growth. With cities spreading into rural areas, viable farm land is being paved over. Even if cities are built upward instead of outward, eventually there would not be sufficient land for food production for all of the people who self ishly want to eat daily. The best solution will be to ship people off to colonies in or der to feed themselves and hopefully pro duce food to send back to the home world. Pathfinder, Mir and all of the other cur rent space- related activities are impor tant for what they could mean for human ity. The advances that occurred in the past have not stopped — medical and comput er advances, especially, still are being prodded along by the space program. And even if all people don’t share the desire to explore the stars, eventually humans are going to have to live among them. 5 sap miipiii A.'.'ie- A, 5 ■ 1 5*... Graphic: Ed Goodwin Pat Robertson, Rupert Murdoch fcma unethical pact Eliminating the dollar saves society I Jeremy Valdez Guest Columnist, Senior journalism major I t’s hard enough to be a Christ ian today without waking up to find another high-profile f'angelist getting caught with his hand in the cookie jar. Thanks a lot,Pat Robertson, for being the latest to perpetuate the stereo- fipethat casts us as greedy, holi- er-than-thou hypocrites. Most news watchers know that media mogul and sleaze-king Ru pert Murdoch would sell his mom tothe devil for a dollar, but it is slightly more surprising that Hobertson is piping his cable chan nel into Murdoch’s Satanic family mom in a deal worth $1.7 billion. In a move certain to once again niake Christians look two-faced, Hobertson is selling Murdoch thirty percent of International Family Entertainment, the corporation that operates The Family Channel. In return, Robertson will receive stock in Murdoch’s News Corp., the media empire that owns the Fox Network. Not long ago, Robertson used hisreligious talk show, The 700 Club, to warn people that God has little obligation at the present time to spare America, because we are polluting the world with our television programs, with our movies and so forth.” Nobody is more knee-deep in the media sewage than Murdoch (except maybe Penthouse publish er Lany Flint who is wheelchair- deep). Under Murdoch’s leadership, the Fox Network has spawned such great family shows as Melrose Place, Married...with Children, Pacific Pal isades, Tire Ruby Wax Show, Millen nium and A Current Affair. Since 1989, Fox has been on Robertson’s hit list. He often has called for his flock to boycott com panies who advertise on shows ha Married... with Children. Now it seems he has put down the pick et sign long enough to crawl into bed with Murdoch. It doesn’t take a prophet, false m otherwise, to see why Robert son has formed a partnership with the man responsible for the Punchiest TV being aired. Money is the motivation. The partnership seems to be §ood business for both IFE and News Corp. IFE’s Family Channel is moving from religious program ming to more secular shows in an attempt to attract viewers. The Family Channel could use Fox shows to boost sagging rat ings, and Fox wants an outlet it can use to challenge Nick elodeon in the lucrative chil dren’s programming market. Gradually, perhaps so that Robertson’s followers won’t notice, The Family Channel has been los ing its family programming and re placing it with shows such as Hawaii Five-O and Columbo, as well as a library of old western films displaying the good ol’ American values of white men who kill Native Americans with big guns. Robertson and Murdoch have long been at opposite ends of the programming spectrum. However, analysts who know both of them claim the partnership is just crazy enough to work, because the two share conservative political views and a common business sense. If Murdoch is a conseivative, then conservatism has come to mean nothing more than the overzealous pursuit of wealth and cutthroat politicking to help in the chase. Any larger definition would exclude Murdoch, a political chameleon who champions the cause of unbridled free expression on Monday only to cut a business deal widi an oppressive communist government in China on Tuesday. Robertson’s behavior illustrates that he and Murdoch definitely share a certain moral flexibility as long as money is involved. Their partnership calls to mind one of the great Christian fund rais ing questions: Is it ethical for a pas tor to accept donations he knows are tainted, say by prostitution or organized crime, to build a church for his congregation? That’s a tough question, but lately Robertson is more like a pas tor who opens a brothel or does a couple of hits for the mob. The current buzz is that Mur doch has little intention of turning The Family Channel into another sex-and-violence candy stand, and Robertson maintains enough control to ensure that The 700 Club will continue to air on The Family Channel so that he may minister for the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. But for now, Robertson has mortgaged the credibility of all Christians with a merger that forms a new trinity, made of a preacher, a S ociety sometimes changes the law, and sometimes the law changes society. The interac tion of these two permanent fix tures in human life is easily distin guishable in the mythological concept of a “cashless society.” Once the plaything of science- fiction writers, the theory of the cashless society has been a hot top ic of debate for many years. Cash seems inconvenient to carry around. Almost everybody hates loose change, and pennies seem to adorn dressers and desks more often than they actually con tribute in economic transactions. Some argue that the cost of minting new and replacing old currency warrants a system of electronic transactions on magnetic stripped cards. This debate took on new meaning when just over a year ago, NationsBank unveiled the pre-paid Visa cash card for the Atlanta Olympics. Now, the project has been expand ed and is growing fast. Wherever credit cards are accepted, check cards can be used to deduct directly from the user’s bank account. Even at the grocery store, customers can now use their automated teller cards to buy gro ceries with just a swipe and the entering of their four-digit identification number. The merchants who offer payment with check cards also have many advan tages. The money lost when incorrect change is given would be totally elimi nated. The risk of theft for businesses that keep a certain amount of cash available for making change or just gen eral store operations would be reduced. Banks are looking at new smart card technology to make many services easi er. Much like the check cards, these cards will also be able to process several types of infor mation per customer. Banks will be able to offer Columnist Stephen Llano Senior history major flow of illegal drugs into the United States. The majority of drug transac tions on a day-to-day basis are han dled easily with cash. If all money was electronic and required cards to process, this interaction would be easily traceable. Without an anony mous method to deal drugs, narcotic dealers would be rendered inept. Of course this advantage is a pipe dream, at best. History demonstrates that if there is a demand, someone will find a way to supply it. Even in the present system, drugs could be bought without cash. Phone banking allows cus tomers to transfer money from their accounts to another as easily as making a phone call. With daily transactions being recorded with scrutiny, almost every purchase or transaction made could be seen for any indi vidual. Although it would be helpful for ex amining the monthly household expendi tures, this sort of financial record would be dangerous if available to just anyone. Texas A&M student ID cards create a sort of cashless society on campus. Having an ID stolen could result in the loss of Aggie bucks, entry to the student’s dorm, unau thorized checking out of library books, and a big headache to get it replaced. Now, imagine if it was that individuals entire fi nancial record. There is a greater element of responsibility with smart cards or check cards. Since they draw directly on an ac count when used, theft is much harder to fix than with credit cards. The technology regarding security would have to be increased. It wasn’t until fairly re cently that purchases over the World Wide Web became secure enough to be safe. And even with assurances of security for internet transactions, for consumers, perception is reality. If the consumer doesn’t feel comfort able with it, they will not use it. Many states, including Texas, have already devised a debit card system for welfare recipi ents. But the question of the working poor still remains. Many hard-working Americans bare ly scrape by from paycheck to paycheck, cash ing one and praying the money lasts until the next pay day. Without a bank account, those that skim the top of the poverty line would be left in the dust by a so-called advancement. The problems are severe, and the advan tages very tantalizing. But whatever the re sult one thing stands clear: whatever the circumstances, the federal government can not mandate the switch. It must be allowed to progress at the pace citizens want — and that can only be satisfied in a free market of competing financial institutions. As the technology advances and becomes more affordable, individ uals can decide for themselves if this new technology will help or hinder their pocketbooks. many more services more quickly and more easily, from loan applica tions to bal ance transfers with less paperwork, and less chance for fraud. The technology is cheap, and it may lower the cost of some banking services for customers. Instant, painless, and easier than writing a check, the advantages of a totally cashless so ciety could be easily ex trapolated from what is happening in the pre sent system. It seems Americans are ready to embrace the cashless so ciety with open arms, but then the business advan tages turn to legal ones. There are the issues of elec tronic security and privacy to consider. One of the so-called advan tages to having a totally cash less society is the curbing of the M Graphic: Brad Graeber
