Phrase of the Moment:
¤ Phrase: "hella"
¤ Usage: "Hella m'ungry, Punchin!"
¤ Origin: Old Valley-Girl speak, or something like that. It was big in the 80s, vanished, and has been reborn largely thanks to Cartman.
¤ Etymology: It's short for "hell of" I suppose, even though no one has ever used that two-word phrase for the purpose that "hella" exists. It's basically a synonym for "very" or "extremely" and is best used to great excess, or for intentionally-annoying sarcastic effect, in much the same way adults can effectively use L33t sP34k.
¤ Notes: An annoying and stupid word, but one you'll soon find yourself almost powerless to cease overusing, if you dare take a verbal step down that mixed metaphor of a road.  Cartman says "hella" about twenty times in an old episode of South Park, driving everyone else crazy, and while it's amazingly annoying to hear him say it... neither Malaya or I can keep from throwing it into conversation when we get a chance.  Mostly to each other, as a sort of "that sounds so stupid it's funny" joke, but we slip up and use it when talking to other people from time to time as well. Much to their horror, I'm sure. -- May 3, 2004

able modems are a joy, and a burden. Ours has been working perfectly for months. Had been, until the middle of Monday afternoon. Then, around 3pm, it suddenly stopped working, for no apparent reason. This isn't all that unusual; at least every 2 or 3 weeks the service goes down for an hour or two. Generally it comes back on with no problem. Sometimes I have to power off and power back on the cable modem or reset the router, but that's about it. On Monday though, it never came back on, and nothing I did could fix it. The lights on it were weird also.

There are six lights, the top four green and the bottom two yellow. In descending order, they are:

Power, Receive, Send, Online, Activity, Standby

The power, receive, and send should always be solid green. Online is usually flickering, and activity flickers when there's... activity.  Which is pretty much all the time, with a firewall repelling DNS look ups and such. Standby should only be on if we actually push the stand by button to reset a problem.

On Monday evening, the power and receive lights were on all the time, send was blinking, and online, activity, and standby were all dark. Standby wouldn't even come on when I pushed and held the standby button. I called tech support, endured their phone menu, talked to a person, got confirmation that it was not pinging at all, and they scheduled me for the first repair appointment they had available... on the 13th.

Now as you can imagine, neither Malaya or I were willing to sit around and wait 10 days for some cable guy to come out here and jiggle whatever wire had gone loose in the cable box on the outside wall of the apartment. It was clearly a hardware problem, so I was thinking about buying a new cable modem and seeing if that fixed it, but before doing that I had to experiment some. We've got 3 separate coaxial cables connected together to cover the 30 feet or so between the cable modem/computer desks and the wall outlet, where the wire goes into a splitter and sends one wire into the back of the VCR, and the other across the room to the cable modem. It didn't seem unlikely that one of the connections was bad, or one of the wires was bad, so I unstrung them all from the top of the back patio blinds and the bookshelf, and tried connecting with the first one out of the loop. No change.

Fortunately for my patience, since each change requires me to unplug the cable modem (no power switch), give it 30 seconds to reset completely, unscrew the coax cables, screw in the new coax cable, plug it back in, and wait 60 seconds for it to power up and try to connect and establish an IP#, I skipped screwing with the rest of the wires individually, unplugged the CM, and took it over to the entertainment console, where I pulled the coax up from the nest of wires, unscrewed it from the splitter, and hooked the CM directly to the plug coming out of the wall. 

And it worked perfectly, much to my surprise.

I even took the 30 foot ethernet cord that we use for Malaya's laptop and hooked it between the router and the cable modem, just to be sure it was actually working, rather than just displaying lights to make us think it was working. And yes, it was. I got online and checked all my favorite Swedish Norwegian goat porn sites and everything.

The problem seemed clear; it was obviously the splitter that was broken. I unplugged the CM, hooked it back up to the wire through the splitter just to be sure, and yep, it didn't work that way, but did work directly. How the splitter could have broken from one hour to the next, without being touched, was a mystery, but that's just the fun and magic of computers.

Just to be sure, I switched the router cords around; hooking the VCR to the CM, and vice versa. The modem still didn't work, which was fine. However, when I turned on the TV just to double check... it worked. At this point mental processes halted for a moment, as I tried to figure out if I'd somehow thought I was switching them and then screwed them right back into the same prongs, or what.  Eventually I convinced myself that I hadn't, at which point I was really confused. How in the hell could the cable TV work through either side of the splitter, while the CM worked through neither side?

Then I remembered; it's electronic hardware, hardware related to a computer. It doesn't have to make any sort of sense, and in fact it's foolish to expect that it will.

A 1-800 call and 15 minute wait later, I was again talking to Comcast tech support, and relating this new information. After all, I'd initially called to report that nothing was working, and now it was working... just not very well. Frankly, I expected incredulity at my report; after all, tech support are trained (especially on the job) to assume that anything anyone calls about is their fault. Especially when it's something more complicated than plugging a TV into a wall outlet. So I expected my story about the magic non-working splitter would be greeted with laughter.

Surprisingly enough, it wasn't, and the woman on the phone said something about us possibly having such a low signal that it wouldn't work through the splitter. Why this could have suddenly started up Monday afternoon, after 8 months of trouble-free operation, is the question I can't yet begin to answer. Unfortunately, they still didn't have any service appointments sooner than the 13th, so I anticipated a week and a half of annoyance and constant switching cables back and forth.

See, the cable modem works, but only if you plug it directly into the wall outlet. Which means we can either watch cable TV, or use the cable modem. But not both at the same time.  I'd be okay with that, since there's nothing on TV I really care about watching over the next week and a half besides the three remaining games in the Lakers/Spurs series, and maybe Survivor. Malaya, on the other hand, tapes several hours of amusingly stupid trash TV every weekday, and likes to have the TV on as background noise while she does reading for work or for her own book project. And no, the white noise of static isn't good enough for her background noise needs.

To be honest, I would sort of miss the trash TV, since I watch most of it with Malaya, or at least hear it in the background while I'm making dinner or doing other things around the condo, and it's fun to watch and snark on the idiots on Jerry Springer, when I'm watching it with Malaya. I'd never watch it again in my life on my own, but it's fun to do the color commentary with Malaya as my appreciative audience. Plus it's eerie how often Jerry makes a joke I just made, based on some guest saying something stupid.

All of that soon became irrelevant though, when I got up Tuesday morning, turned on the computer... and could not get online. The cable modem was doing it's "no online light" thing again, whether I tried it through the splitter or not, and yes, the cable TV worked in any setting. I tried another call to tech support, described the ever-evolving problem, and amazingly-enough, talked to another tech person who didn't immediately deny that anything was broken/try to blame it all on me. She pinged us, verified that we had no signal at all, listened to the splitter issue, and (said she) put us at the top of the list for a service appointment, as soon as there's a technician in the area or a cancellation. They said to expect a call from a service guy inside of 24 hours, which briefly got my hopes up. Of course it's been 16 hours so far and no call, but Wednesday morning/afternoon, with any luck.

She also tried to reset our IP# remotely, even though the cable modem wasn't online, which seemed helpful, at the time.

And it was, but I don't think it was a good thing in the long run, since Tuesday night, when I tried it again, the modem did work directly from the wall; but the router wouldn't. All the lights were on, I had it set to "automatically obtain IP#", etc, all the damned network stuff those of you not blessed with broadband and/or multiple computers have yet to experience. This resulted in a fourth call to tech support, and an inability to get online via the router. I just ended up connecting the cable modem directly to my computer, which worked for about an hour. I was going to try hooking Malaya's computer up directly, but she had a headache and felt dizzy, probably from listening to my end of four tech support calls in a day, and announced that she'd be going to bed early. I offered to hook her computer up quickly so she could at least do an email check and some quick surfing, but before she could decide, I noticed that the cable modem was again down, with no online light.

With that she was definitely going to bed, so I unplugged the CM and went in and laid next to her for a while and we talked in our usual "someone is going to sleep while the other person is going to be awake for hours yet" routine. Returning to the living room half an hour later, I plugged the cable back in... and it worked again. For about 30 minutes, at which point it again cut out.  I've been typing this tale since it died, and when I finish this and some other stuff for the blog, I'll save it all and get ready to upload, and with any luck the connection will be back up then.

During the day Tuesday, I was thinking that the signal strength was screwed up through the entire condo complex. I don't know if that makes any sense, but perhaps there's only so much bandwidth or signal, and if too many people have their cable in use at once we're not getting enough strength in our signal to keep the CM going? It doesn't really make sense to me; I mean it's not like water pressure and my shower dribbling while my neighbor is watering her plants after the guy down the hall flushed his toilet. Electricity doesn't dribble out if everyone has their blender on at once; it works, or it doesn't and blows out circuit breakers.

Nevertheless, since I well know that logic is seldom of use in computer repair issues, I'm not willing to rule that one out. In fact, it made sense during the day Tuesday, after I was online just fine at 5am, but unable to get on at noon or 5pm.  Other people were using their cable, thus depriving us of sufficient juice for our modem. Unfortunately for this theory, it's been in and out all night, even now at 1am, when I'm sure there aren't as many people using their cable as there were during primetime.

I'll try to refrain from forming additional theories tomorrow, since they just frustrate me. With any luck we'll get a repair guy out here Wednesday or Thursday, he can fix the loose/squirrel-chewed wires, and I can then spend about three hours trying to get the router working again.  The needless complexity of that device could be the subject of about ten blogs just by itself, and I'm pretty sure it's 98% due to me trying to control it with my WinXP computer as the master machine. Now that Malaya has her new G4 Mac, we'll probably reinstall everything with that one as the master, and see how that works. In fact, there's nothing installed on her machine; when she got it a couple of months ago she just plugged it in and the Mac OSX configured a pathway, automatically set an IP#, and she was online in about 30 seconds.

Meanwhile, back in PC land, I spent something like 5 days trying, ultimately without success, to get two machines online through the same cable modem connection back in San Diego, and then again up here before I finally tricked it into working and letting my old and my new computer get online at the same time. One was running XP and one was on Win98, which might have been an added problem, but knowing Windows, I'm pretty sure I'd have needed an MCSE to get it working even on two new XP boxes inside of a weekend.

Back in the present, It's now 1:30am, and yes, the modem is working again. I'm not yet ready to upload the blog, mostly due to the surf-fest I've been engaged in over the last 15 minutes. I had three browser windows open, each on a different site I wanted to read in case the connection suddenly went down again, and since two of those were blogs with numerous links to other news things I wanted to read, I kept clicking every link to open in a new window. Add in all of those windows with their attendant pop ups, and I had more RAM than it takes to run the space shuttle devoted entirely to multiple instances of MIE6.0

It reminds me of my old, pre-cable modem surfing days, when I'd always have 3 or 4 windows open, and always be shuttling between them so I could keep graphics-intensive pages loading at all times on the minimized pages, while I was viewing the one page that had already finished loading. I'm not real nostalgic about this, to be honest. If I wanted to surf like I was using AOL, I'd move to Kansas, damnit.

I said there would be reader mail today, and there was going to be, until the news/movie thing below got so long, and the above discussion of cable modem fun took over the world. Just one odd news item today, and I'll return on Friday, technology-permitting, with odd reader mail on Pat Tillman, reviews vs. personal stuff, and more.

Oh, I did add a new First Time mail today, and it's a rarity; a First Time mail from someone who really did write it during their first time. I also reworded the questions at the top of the page to streamline them a bit. Lastly, if you've been reading this site for a while, but you've never send in a First Time mail, it's never too late. Assuming you can even remember a damn thing about where you came from or what you first thought.

¤ I found this one very interesting. It's an article about sexual issues on long space missions, and it makes the claim that NASA may be looking into chemical sterilization of astronauts, for the duration of any long missions, such as the three year trip to Mars and back. 

Dr Rachel Armstrong, speaking yesterday at a British Interplanetary Society symposium on the Human Future and Space, said the US space agency Nasa was considering how to deal with the natural urges of astronauts travelling on long journeys such as a three-year trip to Mars, where the six-strong crew would be likely to include two women.

"Nasa is talking about the chemical sterilisation of astronauts on longer journeys," Dr Armstrong said, in a talk discussing the problems humanity may face in trying to reach the planets and, eventually, the stars.

...that denial may hide a reluctance, in a nation where the showing of a nipple on national television provokes a religious outcry, to discuss the rather delicate subject of sex in space. Certainly, some scientists believe it is a topic that should be dealt with head on. Douglas Powell, a psychology professor at Harvard University who was recruited in 1999 by Nasa to investigate the behavioural needs of long-term space trips, said: "Like anywhere, these are normal healthy people in their prime and they are sexually active so they are going to get involved with each other. So what's going to happen in space? It's a serious question and it needs to be confronted."

Unusually for a space issue, it is one where physical problems would not arise, as the presence or absence of gravity doesn't affect body mechanics.

But scientists such as Professor Powell are concerned that the emotional fallout from having a crew where some are happier than others, or where relationships are made and then fall apart, could be disastrous. He noted the comments of one Russian cosmonaut about time spent cooped up in the Mir space station that "when you have two people locked up in a very small environment for months at a time, all the conditions for murder are met." Mix in sex, and you almost have the script of Othello in space.

made an error in my "upcoming movies that will flop" discussion in Monday's blog. I said the upcoming Hannibal movie was being directed by Oliver Stone. I was close, but I had my largely-forgotten ancient world military leaders confused. Stone is writing/directing Alexander, starring Colin Farrell and due in late 2004. It's not to be confused with the Untitled Alexander the Great Project, directed by Baz Luhrmann and starring Leo DiCaprio, and due in 2005. Hannibal is also coming in 2005, and it will star Vin Diesel.

If you're wondering if Hollywood really thinks there's enough of an ancient world battle movie audience to make King Arthur, Troy, 2 Alexander the Great movies, and a Hannibal movie, yes, yes they do. And yes, they've been wrong before.

In another follow up to the bombing big movies discussion, there's a brand new Trailer #2 out for The Day After Tomorrow global warming disaster movie. It looks better than the first one did, and I enjoyed seeing the special effects and the hundred foot storm surges rushing between the skyscrapers in Manhattan. However I still can't really see how this one is going to be the blockbuster it needs to be to make back the money they spent on it. It doesn't really look like a movie, in terms of being a visual medium to relate a story. It looks like every disaster special effect they could think of, with various vignettes of people trying to survive them. I guess such an ensemble piece could work, but viewers generally demand a strong human element to go along with their eye candy tsunamis and tornados, and I don't see much evidence of it in these trailers.

However, I still want everyone to go see this movie, just to screw with the suicidally science-denying idiots in the Bush Administration. Why? This story got some play a couple of weeks ago, but I don't believe I ever mentioned it on the blog. All environmental scientists working for NASA are ordered to decline comment on the movie and especially on the global warming issues it addresses. I'd like to quote the entire article, since it's interesting and since a lot of you probably don't have a NYT cookie to allow you to read it. But that would disrupt the blog flow as well as violate fair use laws, so I'll just quote generously, while recommending that you get a NYT cookie for future use. Just sign up, it lasts forever.

In "The Day After Tomorrow," a $125 million disaster film set to open on May 28, global warming from accumulating smokestack and tailpipe gases disrupts warm ocean currents and sets off an instant ice age. Few climate experts think such a prospect is likely, especially in the near future. But the prospect that moviegoers will be alarmed enough to blame the Bush administration for inattention to climate change has stirred alarm at the space agency, scientists there say.

"No one from NASA is to do interviews or otherwise comment on anything having to do with" the film, said the April 1 message, which was sent by Goddard's top press officer. "Any news media wanting to discuss science fiction vs. science fact about climate change will need to seek comment from individuals or organizations not associated with NASA."

Copies of the message, and the one from NASA headquarters to which it referred, were provided to The New York Times by a senior NASA scientist who said he resented attempts to muzzle climate researchers.

After all, nothing says action and concern for a climate reality that 99% of the world's atmospheric scientists agree on like a gag order. Issues like global warming and other environmental issues are the perfect example of why government must exist to set laws to limit toxic business practices. The glorious "invisible hand of the market" is fine for short term practices to boost productivity and profits. But it's entirely useless for long term "greater good" type issues.

It's in the long term interest of everyone on earth that oil companies build cleaner refineries, car manufacturers work on higher fuel efficiency cars, governments fund clean energy alternative research, etc. But none of that is immediately profitable, and in fact, complying with most environmental regulations is an expense and a burden for business. And if their profit-happy business practices lead to global warming that eventually raises the sea levels 20 feet and destroys every coast line city on earth, oh well, who could have seen that one coming? Plus, it'll require a ton of energy to build all of the dykes and dams and levees and build all those new houses way up on the new coastline, and increased energy consumption is good for business!

Anyway, back to the article: 

Late last week, however, NASA appeared to relax its stand on discussing the movie. Though she did not disavow the e-mail, Gretchen Cook-Anderson, a spokeswoman at NASA headquarters, said on Thursday that the agency would make scientists available to discuss issues raised by the film.

"We've decided not to proactively speak out on anything related to the movie," she said. "But when asked, we can certainly provide some of our experts to answer questions about the validity of the science."

...

The initial efforts by NASA headquarters to limit comments angered some government researchers.

"It's just another attempt to play down anything that might lead to the conclusion that something must be done" about global warming, one federal climate scientist said. He, like half a dozen government employees interviewed on this subject, said he could speak only on condition of anonymity because of standing orders not to talk to the news media.

Amusingly enough, this movie's events are so over the top that pro-environment groups don't like it either.

Some leaders of nonprofit environmental groups are also distressed about the movie, though for different reasons. In conference calls and e-mail exchanges, they have said it so overstates the issue — turning a decades-long or century-long threat into one that explodes over five days — that it might cause people to simply laugh off the real questions.

While the NYT article says NASA admitted the muzzle email, but had changed their policy, other news items have them denying that it ever existed in the first place. It's pretty sad that scientists have to choose between telling the truth about environmental issues or continuing to receive government funding for their work, but that's what you get when business interests own the White House.

<-- Previous  --  Next -->
Archives Index Page