First, my condolences. I cannot imaging the pain your family is facing.

Second, I will concur with other posters. Don't focus so much on preserving your wife into the future that you forget to make memories now.

That said, I am having my family do something proactively that might be of service. Particularly with my mother (who at 64 isn't exactly old yet, but anything can happen).

Write letters. I mean the hand-written kind. One for birthdays, graduations, weddings, first jobs, grandchildren, and other major events. It will be difficult to do, but tell your wife to mentally take a trip to the future. She's watched her kids grow up and now face an important life event. What would she like to say to them? Advice? Congratulations? Stories? I would suggest having your wife do this in chronological order, giving her the opportunity to mentally and emotionally age the kids and take a mental stroll through their future.

You didn't mention your children's gender, but if they are girls I would also suggest those letters cover some of the mother/daughter talks about growing up. Menstruation, first boyfriend, first kiss... you get the idea.

Video is good, but sometimes they are hard to watch. And, as others have already commented, letting go and letting time dull the memories is just as important as remembering. The past is a great place to visit, but you can't live there.

After you wife has passed, you will be her representative. She can't parent from the grave (apologies if that sounds cold) simply because there isn't a 2-way conversation. But at least with these letters she can share her most important thoughts directly with the kids... and give you a starting place.

 

Great suggestion. I have one from my father. He's been gone 12 years, and one in a very long while I'll pull it out and spend some time in the past. If you do this though... be sure to store it in several layers of plastic. One won't be enough over time. 12 years and my dad's smell is just about gone.

Well, this makes it a lot easier for me to answer this question from OpenSource.com.

We're far enough away from any likely candidate systems that we would only pick up very high power omni-directional signals - in other words, intentional beacons. Such a beacon is unlikely to be highly encoded (though there might be an associated signal that *is* highly encoded, and to which there is a pointer in the beacon signal). In other words, we don't have to worry too much about the Kolmogorov complexity of extra-terrestrial signals, because we won't be "overhearing" anything.

As someone who is not in favor of the chicken-little approach to climate change, I would like to comment on this. I speak for no one but myself and would be happy to find errors in logic.

We *know* through geological records that this planet has undergone many changes in climate, including ice, flood, fire, drought, etc. Scientists *think* - based on the limited evidence available - that greenhouse gasses are the culprit. This time. Scientists also *know* that mankind, through industry and machinery, produces greenhouse gasses. Therefore mankind must be the cause. It's been a long time since I took logic, but as I see this as a questionable conclusion at best.

Assuming the information I have read is correct, greenhouse gasses are caused by nature far more than man. I can't find the reference, but recall a study published last year that showed the bovine population - both dairy and meat - producing more greenhouse gasses than all of mankind. So... do we eat less beef and drink less milk?

I believe that we have a responsibility to be good stewards of our environment, and as such should take reasonable precautions to protect our planet. However, let's not confuse that with the 'sky is falling' mantra. It may very well be, but when we speak in a geological time frame even as short as man's sojourn on this planet... there is simply insufficient evidence to be certain. That does not absolve us from responsibility as stewards, but it should temper our responses.

My conclusions:

1. Anyone who claims that the climate is not changing is lying to themselves.
2. Anyone who claims that they can prove WHY the climate is changing is lying to the rest of us.
3. Anyone who claims to have a solution is trying to sell you snake oil.

Regarding the OP, I sincerely hope that this issue isn't over. This is a debate that should continue.

Cheers

I'll second that. Privacy aside, it will be a sad day when my own vehicle become the government's enforcer for speeding... reporting me for every violation.

I'm imagining a license system like in 'The Fifth Element". You get into your vehicle, insert your license... and it let's you drive based on a point system.

Funny? Perhaps.

Impossible? Nope!

Terrifying? Absolutely!

Every child in the use is entitled to a PUBLICLY FUNDED education up to the 12th grade. Unless you live in an petroleum or gambling funded state, that's not quite the same as FREE. Just look at your next property tax bill. Every single property PAYS for those children to get that education.

That said, it's ridiculous that our "free" educational systems cost more than many a university education. According to the National College Board, the average 2009-2010 cost for a university is $7,020 / year (http://www.collegeboard.com/student/pay/add-it-up/4494.html). According to the US Census Bureau (http://www2.census.gov/govs/school/07f33pub.pdf) in 2007 (the latest numbers available) we paid an average of $9666 for each student. It's an interesting comparison and begs several quality control questions. I'll leave those for a different discussion.

Either way, nothing is free - or even cheap - when it's provided by the government.

(1.3*R)C(2.0*R), where C = O(25*h)

Actually.... while PKD may have provided the original thought (I don't know this to be true or false), the move "Total Recall" was an adaptation of a Pier Anthony book by the same name.

You are assuming that people can't keep up with change. Sounds like you've never worked with top notch people. A truly talented IT guy can keep up with innovations well into his 70s - if he pushes himself (or herself).

I would say the issues go back to Adobe's refusal to license postscript as a display language for the OS X display rendering engine and their original refusal to write a version of Premiere for OS X (which lead to the birth of Final Cut).

Unlike 90% of Boston (the relatively new Back Bay is the exception, as that was built on 19th century fill), Chicago is on a grid.