01 Feb 2003 | PissedOff said...

This event has made me hate the media even more. Within two hours of the news they already have experts with their opinions, all sorts of video footage of the explosion, images of the astronauts, and every news person asking "what happened?". IT'S WAY TOO EARLY. The one thing that pissed me off was the this is not a terrorist attack message. I had to read the story on BBC to avoid all this shallowness of the US Media.

01 Feb 2003 | SU said...

99.9% of us have zero direct connection to the events that unfolded this morning in East Texas. And yet in the media and in our homes many of us mourn. Why?

I feel like such tragedies resonate so strongly in America because they shake our faith in technology as a cure for all that ails us. When high technology fails or is used against us -- when the NSA/CIA/FBI early warning intelligence gathering apparatus fails to notify us of a pending terrorist attack or when the space shuttle breaks up over Texas -- the feeling (however poorly grounded) that technolgy will vanquish death comes under attack.

We're forced to reconcile just how little those airbags could do in a real accident. We're forced to wonder whether all that radiation and chemotherapy could really cure us when the oncologist comes knocking. Part of us may even wonder if there may be something to the supposed health risks of pesticides and herbicides.

Or maybe we're all just searching for something to share with each other -- some common event that unites us for a time. I don't know...

Airplanes crash all over the world on a regular basis (particularly small ones in mountainous areas). Denver, CO experienced a mid-air collision between two small planes just last week, killing 4 people. The mundane nature of that crash (old planes, bad weather, pilot error), however, meant that it received little attention in the national headlines. And those kinds of accidents happen every week.

More and more, it takes a catastrophic failure in our technology to thrust an event off the pages of the local news and into the national media spotlight. And once an event is in that spotlight... Hang on to your seats. We're in for a long ride.

01 Feb 2003 | SU said...

On another note... Does anyone think this will seriously affect the future of humans in space? Manned missions are far more costly and dangerous than ones using robots.

Do we really need to be sending humans off-planet to do a job a remote-controlled robot could do just as well (if not better)?

01 Feb 2003 | Mal Ross said...

SU said:

Do we really need to be sending humans off-planet to do a job a remote-controlled robot could do just as well (if not better)?

Do we need to? No. Will we? Yes... but give it time. As a race, I think we'll always feel the need to reach for the stars, and in every sense. Stuff like today's tragedy will hurt us for a while, but it won't ultimately stop us. We don't just want to see what's out there, we want to be out there.

01 Feb 2003 | huh? said...

SU said:

I feel like such tragedies resonate so strongly in America because they shake our faith in technology as a cure for all that ails us.

I stopped trusting technology the moment I decided I was going to make a career out of it. No matter how perfect the technology could be there is always a human (be in the programmer or operator) that gets involved. This has led me to develop projects that are extremely clear and obvious.

We blame technology because we don't want to admit we may not be operating it correctly.

01 Feb 2003 | SU said...

We blame technology because we don't want to admit we may not be operating it correctly.

Kind of funny, though, isn't it -- technology wouldn't even exist if we didn't create it. Maybe one day machines will build themselves, but until then, it's folly to think technology could be any more perfect than its human creators.

And that's my point -- we often try to believe that technology (an inherently human construct) can be perfect. Events like this shatter that myth.

01 Feb 2003 | ek said...

I don't know, to me the sadness I felt when I heard the news had nothing to do with technology. For instance, if an unmanned space shuttle had exploded on re-entry I really wouldn't have given it a second thought.

What made me sad was that seven courageous human beings were killed. These were people who were willing to risk their lives, not in pursuit of money, or glory, or conquest, but simply for knowledge. How many of us would be willing to do that? These were special people and their loss saddens me, even though I don't have a direct connection to any of them.

01 Feb 2003 | ~bc said...

ek's the only one who's gotten this right so far. these seven people gave their lives to advance our understanding of science. Through their training, they all knew the risks involved, as opposed to the public's misconception that the Space Shuttle is as trusty as an elevator, just close the door and you're in space. Hello? Have you seen the size of the fuel tank they ride up on? Have any concept of the temp's the the atmosphere is exerting on the bottom of the shuttle (inches from their butts) upon reentry. Do you even know how fast Mach 6 is? For God's sakes, anyone who isn't mourning the loss of these 7 is simply self-absorbed.

01 Feb 2003 | Mart said...

They're all heroes - not because they tragically perished, but because they stepped onto that Space Shuttle in the first place. True grit.

02 Feb 2003 | SU said...

The loss of their lives is a horrible thing, particularly given that most had young families that will surely miss them. But why is it such a valiant thing to die because you volunteered for a dangerous job? Seriously... Why is it tragic to die doing something you volunteered to do?

Are people who volunteered to fight in WWII more tragic figures than those who faced the draft and lost their lives?

Have any concept of the temp's the the atmosphere is exerting on the bottom of the shuttle (inches from their butts) upon reentry. Do you even know how fast Mach 6 is?

I grew up in a town where visits from Goddard Space Flight Center scientists were commonplace during elementary school. I worked on a research program with NASA from 1992-1994. A good friend of mine works at Hubble Telescope Control. Several other friends work as contractors for NASA on various research projects. I mourn along with them.

The loss of human life -- particularly of those in pursuit of advancing human knowledge -- is certainly heartbreaking. But why the media saturation and outpouring of sympathy? Why is their death -- the death of 7 people who died doing what they loved most -- so profoundly tragic to us all?

As Mart and Ernest mentioned, I always thought the most courageous part was that they volunteered to do their jobs at all. Perhaps this outpouring of sympathy is more a form of retroactive appreciation for that initial courage. I'm just working to understand the psychology behind our reaction to events like this.

02 Feb 2003 | Brian said...

I agree with the statements about the media, but honestly, how many of you felt the same grief as you did when something REALLY tragic happened last. I am being honest when i say, that the same emotions past through my mind as when i hear of a multi-car pileup involving death on the hiway.

Another thing no one is talking about is the fact that one of the astronauts was indian, and had gone from being an immigrant to an astronaut, which is impressive in its own right....

02 Feb 2003 | alisha said...

Why is it tragic to die doing something you volunteered to do?
---
very good point. these people helped the advancement of man. I felt sad when I heard the news, but more proud for them that they had achieved their goals in life. Were lucky to have had them. Its easy to market situations like this to the masses; add lots of emotion and drama and show it every 5 mintes. It turns the sad, proud, bittersweet moment into another reason to wallow in misery and disgust. not exactly productive or positive.

02 Feb 2003 | Steven Garrity said...

Good discussion. I too was angered by the media coverage (and I get Canada's public broadcasting network, which is usually quite good). Saying "it doesn't look like this was terrorism, but we aren't sure" over and over - I had to shut it off.

I also wonder about why this has such an impact. Of course, it should go without saying in a discussion like this that it is tragic - regardless of the risks taken - there are now children without parents. I reminded me of the theme in Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine, that we live in a culture of fear.

That said - it is worth reporting - going to space is pretty extraordinary. I'm not sure what it is about some events in the news that get to me, and some that don't. This didn't - I sympathize for the families (especially after a friend pointed out that they were probably all waiting together to having a welcoming party) - but I don't feel it. It's too distant - too surreal.

I can watch bombings in Afghanistan, suicide bombers in Israel, and random car-jackings on the news all without feeling anything. Some events to resonate though. Columbine was too real I was home sick that day watching TV and it was live while they were still roaming the school. I had to turn it off. Sept 11 hit me too I think due to the scale, and the proximity (I can remember standing on the roof of one of the towers with my Dad a few years ago).

Im not sure what Im getting at but the news sure is odd.

02 Feb 2003 | fajalar said...

I feel strange. I didn't find out about it until about 1pm EST. We don't have TV. Turned on the radio to NPR to get some info. Went online to try and see something. But the major online sources want to charge for viewing streams. Got an MSNBC stream, but it was very low quality.

The strange part is that, while I do think it is bad news, I don't really feel much about it. I don't think it has anything to do with the over stimulization of September 11th. Before the Challenger accident happened, every shuttle launch seemed to capture people's imagination. I remember we used to watch each lauch in school. And we watch the Challenger. And we watched the first launch after the Challenger.

But for a long time now I would hear something like, "The shuttle docked with the space station today," and think, "The shuttle went up?" I just haven't paid attentioned to it for a long time.

Maybe it is because there is just to much to try to pay attention to these days. I don't know. I am not being callous. I do feel bad for the families left behind. After reading some of the bios, I do think that these were exceptional people. But I just don't feel all that bad. Maybe I will in a few days. Dunno.

But I do not think we should stop going up. Perhaps we should try launching something a little less fragile, but we need to explore what we can see. As high as the stars, as deep as the ocean. Rightly, they should pause the program and investigate, but they shouldn't stop altogether. Take this sad opportunity to redesign.

Speaking of redesign... I listened to an interview with Alex Roland on NPR this morning. He's long been critical of NASA (supportive of space exploration). An interesting interview.

02 Feb 2003 | Steven Garrity said...

Interesting comments by Dave Winer. Points #1 and #5 are particularly interesting and pertinent to this discussion.

02 Feb 2003 | JF said...

It's so sad. These generous people represent the best of humanity. They carry forward our core insticts of discovery and sacrifice. They are space travelers -- the ultimate pioneering risk takers. They continue to make courage a forward moving target. They leave their healthy lives and familes behind for an adventure that is estimated to result in death one in every 145 missions. That's courage plus one. Like President Reagan said in his beautiful speech on the Challenger disaster back in '86, "They had a hunger to explore the universe and discover its truths. They wished to serve, and they did. They served all of us... We've grown used to the idea of space, and perhaps we forget that we've only just begun. We're still pioneers. They, the members of the Challenger crew, were pioneers... The Challenger crew was pulling us into the future, and we'll continue to follow them..." Swap Columbia for Challenger and re-read.

These folks are the real deal in every way. On a human note, they push our capabilities physically and mentally beyond comprehension. On a technological note, they shave the "fiction" from science fiction. Like EK said, "these were people who were willing to risk their lives, not in pursuit of money, or glory, or conquest, but simply for knowledge." That's what makes them different. That's why we mourn different. It's so sad to have to see humanity's finest returning to Earth in a fragmented ball of flame. At least they got to see the Earth's peaceful, immense beauty from above before it swallowed them whole.

02 Feb 2003 | JF said...

Eerie video of NASA TV coverage recorded as contact was lost with Columbia, including the final communications from the astronauts.

02 Feb 2003 | GetOverIt said...

It's sad to hear about the loss of lives regardless of the reason. It's even worse when many people suddenly show emotions and feeling AFTER they are dead. Turn the clock back to Saturday morning before the news hit the airwaves: did you feel for the astronauts?

Why I am so "coldhearted"? I distinctly remember the following words from Se7en, spoke by John Doe (Kevin Spacey):

Wanting people to listen, you can't just tap them on the shoulder anymore. You have to hit them with a sledgehammer, and then you'll notice you've got their strict attention.

Why have we become so de-sensitized to the "tap on the shoulder"? Look at the people who are part of your life. Why wait until something big happens to remember the small?

02 Feb 2003 | ek said...

Turn the clock back to Saturday morning before the news hit the airwaves: did you feel for the astronauts?

Are you trying to make some kind of grand point? I must admit that I don't get it. I didn't feel for them before the news hit the airwaves because I didn't know that they were dead. Why would I feel sad for them before they had dies?

Why is it tragic to die doing something you volunteered to do?

Depends on what the thing that you volunteered for is. When I hear about skiers being killed in avalanches in remote regions of the world, where they had all gone knowing the risks, I feel a bit of sadness for their families, but -- and I know that this may sound cold -- after a few minutes it's forgotten.

If one of the idiots involved in "Jackass" died while taking part in a stunt that he voluntarily performed I really wouldn't care.

But hearing that seven people who had dedicated their lives to service -- to service that is of benefit to all of us -- had died in performance of that service, that, to me, is very, very sad. These weren't people who were up there just for the hell of it or for a few thrills. They were incredibly dedicated people who contributed a lot more to humanity than most of us.

And I say this as someone who does not have TV reception and who has not been inundated by the media's coverage. I can't speak to why anyone else feels sad, but I can say that I did when I first heard the news and still do.

Back to the point about technology, if I had heard that seven missionaries running a home to feed and shelter those living in poverty had been violently killed I would have felt a very similar type of sadness -- this even though no technology would have been involved. I am irreligious, but I have tremendous respect for those who live by their convictions and who give of themselves and do good because of them.

To me this has nothing to do with technology or the media, but simply humanity.

03 Feb 2003 | Benjy said...

I think that part of the reason so many of us connect with the astronauts is that they are today's pioneers/explorers. They are today's Christopher Columbus, today's Lewis & Clark. Man has always saught to learn about what's out there and has admired those with the passion and fearlessness to take that leap while the rest of us live vicariously through them. We relish in their success and we mourn in their loss.

04 Feb 2003 | Jonny Roader said...

I respect anyone who'll put their lives on the line for what they believe, but I think there's a certain amount of naivety involved in saying that NASA are simply torchholders for the human spirit. For every spine-tingling image of the earth's curvature beamed back to us, some military scientist somewhere is receiving yet more information that makes the militarisation of space a reality.

04 Feb 2003 | virginia said...

I forgot how evil NASA is. Thanks for the reminder.

04 Feb 2003 | JF said...

I like what Charles Krauthammer has to say in this article: It's Time To Dream Higher

04 Feb 2003 | gamma said...

The last paragraph is particularly well put.

04 Feb 2003 | FuelToTheFire said...

http://apnews1.iwon.com//article/20030204/D7P02F201.html

04 Feb 2003 | TryingToMakeSense said...

Are you trying to make some kind of grand point? I must admit that I don't get it. I didn't feel for them before the news hit the airwaves because I didn't know that they were dead. Why would I feel sad for them before they had dies?

I believe the point this person was trying to make was that you may have not felt for them because they hadn't died yet. If they made the journey back safely, would you have thought of them as heros or as people doing their job?

I half agree and half disagree. I cannot care for everyone who is out there because it's too hard. When people die in accidents like these, it saddens me not because I lost someone, but because I can relate to someone dieing before their time.

I do agree with the first post. The media is getting very shallow.

05 Feb 2003 | Jonny Roader said...

"I forgot how evil NASA is. Thanks for the reminder."

I'm not saying that NASA is a military project hiding behind a civilian front, and I'm certainly not disrespecting the sacrifice of those brave people and the loss their families will feel. I'm just saying that it's naive to believe that subsequent US govts. have pumped hundreds of billions of dollars into an agency purely for the love of exploration and scientific endeavour:

"In practical terms, space transportation enables not only the robust civil exploration of space, but also the critical capacity to defend National assets..."
( NASAs Space Launch Initiative)

Besides, imagine this scenario: having won the cold war and putting the USA into economic and ideological retreat, the USSR - the world's unrivalled superpower - continues its push into space through its civilian space programme. What do non-Russians think about space travel then? (Indeed, how did the US feel when Sputnik launched, or when the initiative was handed back by Apollo?) In other words, to say that NASA astronauts are heroes to all humanity is just a little bit suspect. Again, no disrespect whatsoever meant there.

05 Feb 2003 | fajalar said...

Only in the interest of sharing ideas, here'a link to an op/ed piece calling for no more manned space flights.

It's an NYT piece, but I found it on the SeattlePI site.

06 Feb 2003 | Ryan said...

If we are going to mourn so much about this today, we should mourn daily the millions who die everyday from malnutrition, abuse, torture, and other terrible wrongs.

06 Feb 2003 | Don Schenck said...

Ryan, we do better than mourn.

We give our money, which means we give a part of our lives.

And we (the U.S.) TRY to give our ideals, because the problems you mention are most MOST frequent where a repressive regime is in power. Freedom has a lot of rewards.

I don't mourn; I work.

08 Feb 2003 | alisha said...

"And we (the U.S.)..."
---
oh I didnt know you had 100% backing from the american people on that one Don. (dont believe that so many are like you - many arent)

16 Jan 2004 | Jerman said...

At WWDC, I listened to Apple representatives make some excellent points about taking the time to build a 100%-compliant Aqua application, and I think all developers need to look beyond the code and listen to what the folks at Apple have to say

16 Jan 2004 | Joan said...

At WWDC, I listened to Apple representatives make some excellent points about taking the time to build a 100%-compliant Aqua application, and I think all developers need to look beyond the code and listen to what the folks at Apple have to say