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