Saturday, May 19, 2012

. . . Personal Heroes


One of the more common questions you will hear asked among writers when they get together informally is a simple and yet very revealing one: who are your personal heroes?

At most of the major events in the business and tech arena there is an unofficial gathering -- usually a dinner -- for newspaper journalists and columnists that takes place following the first official day of the event, at which writers who work for newspapers gather together to break bread, meet new faces, and basically socialize as they relax following what is invariably a very tense and busy day. Just such a gathering took place after the show at the 2011 CES in Las Vegas.

In terms of painting a mental image of the environment, it was a typical Thursday evening in Las Vegas, which translates to a briskly chilly and wet wind-filled night of the sort that adds exponentially to the attractiveness of a warm and well-lighted restaurant dining room, so the simple act of taking a seat at the large table and wrapping both hands around the hot cup of tea that was placed before us was a very physical as well as emotional act and, as the heat was transferred from the outside of the thick porcelain cup to mildly numb fingers the pleasure of greeting and being greeted by the collection of old friends and strangers who were soon to be new friends was intensified.

As is often the case when I cover events far away from home, I was accompanied by a companion -- and for CES 2011 that companion was one of my oldest and best mates, Geofry Glenn, who I love more than like a brother but as a brother. In simply defined terms our relationship is the sort in which we can say anything to each other and it will be accepted, because we know each other very well and because we care about each other...

So as I took my seat and my first sip of tea on my right was an old friend and on my left an old acquaintance who I first met as a fellow freelance writer in Boston in the early 90's, Gabrial "Gabe" Paxton, who now makes his living writing for a company that provides directed content for company newsletters and the sort of faux-newspapers that are published weekly by major corporations for their employees, and that largely serve as a mixture of internal news relating to the happenings of their companies, as well as related industry or tech news intended to inform about either their own products or the products of other companies with which they have a relationship.

As we settled in Gabe related how his current employer - a well-known consumer electronics manufacturer that, in addition to making television sets and other media tech, was branching out into the world of view-on-demand handheld consumer devices (in this case specifically smart phones) so he was very excited about the different products that were on display at the show from his own and related industry.

Of the two-dozen other faces at this unofficial dinner party there were a handful that I had met before, and sort of knew, but for the most part the rest of the bodies at the table were strangers to me, and naturally as conversations began and moved along we got to know each other. Directly across from me and obviously together as more than simply colleagues from the same newspaper was a man and a woman from Detroit, Michigan whose animated conversation and constant hand-holding at the table made me miss my wife intensely, but that is a different story...

It was the female half of the couple -- who everyone was calling "Gin" but whose name was actually Virginia -- who voiced the familiar question used to facilitate the rituals of getting to know each other: "So, who are your heroes?" Gabe groaned and Geof laughed.

You see I have a long list of personal heroes -- most of whom are writers -- and anyone who regularly reads my newspaper column in the Cape Cod Times is well aware of some of them: Samuel Clemens (more commonly known as Mark Twain) is one, and then Ernest Hemingway, F. Scott Fitzgerald, William Faulkner, Sinclair Lewis, John Steinbeck, L. Frank Baum, and Walt Whitman round out the list of the older ones, who I usually think of as representing the formative deans of American wordsmithing.

Going farther back there is Benjamin Franklin, the poems of the celebrated Samuel "Dictionary" Johnson, and Sir Joseph Banks. Under the heading of relatively more contemporary is historical novelist Patrick O'Brian, who I find to be an incredibly fascinating writer and person both for his body of work but also as a result of his flawed but exceptional character. The name that popped into my mind and so out of my mouth in answer to her question that evening was the French novelist and playwright Françoise Sagan, which I could instantly tell was a surprise to Gin, and also to my friends based upon their reactions...

Geof raised an eyebrow, and it occurred to me that we had never discussed her or her books with each other, but as it turned out he was very well aware of Sagan and, like me, had read her more profoundly revealing works but not her more commercial ones.

"Really?" Gin replied, and it was also evident that she was searching her own mind to try to place that name. The fact that she did not recognize it is not really all that surprising -- as popular as Sagan was on the continent, her popularity here in America was based on a number of more personal events rather than literary ones, so I was prepared to excuse that lack of familiarity, but then her partner instantly leaps in to save the day for her, observing: "Isn't that the French novelist who wrote Bonjour Tristesse when she was little more than a child herself?" he asked...

"That would be her," I agreed, and Geof -- bless him -- chuckled and said "Mauriac called her a charming little monster."

Françoise Quoirez


We rarely have the luxury of influencing the formative events in our lives -- we do not get to pick our parents, or where we are born, and under what circumstances, and even after we begin to live we do not really alter the course of our own lives until we reach the point in our personal destiny at which we begin to question the authority that limits us... Sagan -- whose real name was Françoise Quoirez -- was born in Cajarc and her formative years as the youngest child of what she considered to be bourgeois parents -- her father was a company director (what we call an executive today), and her mother the daughter of landowners -- and in 1954 when she was just 19 years old her first novel, Bonjour Tristesse (Hello Sadness), was published.

The insight and the craft that she demonstrated in Bonjour Tristesse hinted at the very deep well of emotion and talent that existed within her, and it was no surprise to those that knew her well that she was destined to have a long and richly rewarding career as a writer. It was also no surprise to those that knew her that she was destined to live that life as something of an impulsive and indulgent soul -- often referred to as a "loose cannon" or, as François Mauriac did indeed call her on the front page of the French national newspaper Le Figaro, "a charming little monster," and by all accounts she was precisely that.

Sagan's nickname was 'Kiki' and her literary works, crafted with strong but romantic themes that involved wealthy and disillusioned bourgeois characters, tended to focus upon issues like the sexuality of the young during an era in which no matter how progressive it really was, certainly was not ready for dealing openly with that subject.

Bonjour Tristesse was a story about the life of a pleasure-driven 17-year-old named Cécile, and in particular her relationships with her boyfriend and her adulterous, playboy father, and the fact that I read it when I was 17 and during a period of several years in which I was trying very hard to define the purpose of my life (I was such a precocious teenager) and define for myself the boundaries of not just my own life and relations, but for the manner in which it would intersect with the world itself -- I was also in the process of determining what coursework would occupy my first year of university at the time, a fact that should help you in understanding where my head was at through all of this...

At the time that it was published Sagan's character became something of an icon for disillusioned teenagers, a fact that I was aware of thanks to the footnotes in the translation that I was reading and the commentary that one of the previous owners of the book had so helpfully written in the margins, and I was captivated by the emotional turmoil that she laid out on those pages, and her honesty in dealing with subjects that had grown no easier to accept in the thirty years that had passed since she originally wrote about them and when I was reading them, that it instantly stands out in my mind when I read it even today. Of course the association of the book and the period in time when I was reading it for the first time drags out those old memories, but that's OK...

Some of the questions that the book asked were also asked in different ways by other writers -- and in particular the questions it asked silently -- were the sort that were also asked in different ways by Jack Kerouac, J.D. Salinger, Allen Ginsberg and William Burroughs...

Kerouac's On the Road portrays the story of a fierce personal quest for meaning and belonging, and the rapid-fire observations of life that are the very foundation of the story makes it easy to forget that it was an autobiographical tale -- and that behind the code names for the characters in the book were the real people who in addition to being the sometimes traveling companions of Kerouac helped shape the literary history of the era. The point I suppose is that it was real, and so too were the situations that Sagan wrote about, though perhaps less real in the abstract...

On my home page I have a quote from Sagan -- really a sort of observation that she made about life and writing -- that reads "Writing is a question of finding a certain rhythm. I compare it to the rhythms of jazz. Much of the time life is a sort of rhythmic progression of three characters. If one tells oneself that life is like that, one feels it less arbitrary."

A lot of thought went into that observation, and if you spend any time at all reading the autobiographical writings of Sagan you will realize that she wrestled with the issues of not simply the meaning of life, but the process of it; how the more productive humans (you can substitute "writers" for the word "humans" pretty much throughout) tend to set small and attainable goals for themselves, and how as humans we naturally stop ourselves from examining too deeply the purpose of our own life.

When you examine this too closely you invite the demons in, and leave yourself exposed to the hurtful truth that much of what passes for meaning in life is little more than make-work and fabrications that are designed to conceal the fact that, save for a set of keys that open the door to your home or can be used to start your car, the rest of the everything that we are is little more than a basis for distinguishing between ourselves and the animals in the woods.

The reason that Françoise Sagan numbers among my list of personal heroes has to do with the fact that she viewed life on more honest terms than most people are capable of, and left judgment to others. There is much to be said for that sort of honesty.

E3 is just around the corner and I am in the midst of setting my schedule for it while I work on updating a handful of game guides as I rotate between that and working on my more recent assignment, which is one of The Sims games. As I write this visions of the counter at Mr. Churro at Olvera Street is dancing in my head, and I must confess I am very much looking forward to visiting there and indulging in that oh-so-gooey-goodness.

So how is your day shaping up?

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

. . . The End

Like books and movies the modern video game tells a story that has a distinct structure which includes a beginning, a middle, and an end.  The End.  Back in the bad old days when the credits for a movie were the first thing that the audience saw as the movie started to play (and used to be why getting to your seat five minutes late was not as much a big deal as it is today) you knew that the movie you were watching would end with the words "The End" and that was that.

When video games came into their own -- which really if you think about it was only in the last dozen years or so -- they began in some ways by paying an homage to movies, in that a lot of titles (and in particular the really popular and mainstream games) actually play almost like a movie.  Games like the PlayStation 3 exclusive Heavy Rain, and more than simply a handful of titles for the Xbox 360 including Alan Wake, The Godfather series, Wheelman, the Kane & Lynch series, and even the Fallout series often felt more like watching a movie than playing a game, though playing a game you were.

When you reached the end of the game -- which was generally the end of that part of the story since the vast majority of games today that are not already the sequel to another game end in ways that make it possible for the story to proceed in the next game -- the sequel -- but regardless of whether there will be a sequel or not, The End was The End.  It was how the game ended either because that was how it ended, or that was how it ended based upon the decisions that you made as you played it.  Actually that bears explaining...


In games like Heavy Rain, Final Fantasy XIII-2, and the most recent entry in the long-running Fallout series, Fallout: New Vegas, the ending that you got when you completed the story was simply one of several possible endings, and which you saw depended heavily upon how you played the game and what moral choices that you made in the process.  

In some cases you could actually return to an earlier save in the game and cause a different ending to be displayed when you played through the brief bits that were left -- but in The End you accepted what you saw and experienced because, after all, it was The End, right?  You are not expecting that to change, even when you do not much care for the way that it ended...  I mean it is not like you could band together with a group of gamers and demand that the game studio change the way that the game ended, putting pressure on the publisher to make the studio, change it.  Or could you?

Mass Effect 3 -- Game Over?
I am not going to reveal the details of the ending for Mass Effect 3 -- that would easily constitute the sort of spoiler action that instantly violates Wil Wheaton's Prime Directive: Don't be a Dick!  

What I will do is offer an observation that the lack of choice in the Mass Effect series finale is widely claimed by gamers all over the world to be a betrayal of fan faith in the beloved series.  But that is really the point -- the Mass Effect series is not just "pretty cool," or "a terrific game" or even just well-liked or "very popular" in its reach and effect on gamers -- it is literally a beloved series.

Gamers actually care about the characters in the game -- in fact in Mass Effect 2 when the player is forced to choose a member of their team to sacrifice so that the rest could survive,  it was a major heartbreaking moment for a major percentage of the fan base -- so much so that it ended up being widely considered to be the most emotionally devastating moment in the game, and is most frequently cited as the major (often only) point of regret in the game...
____________________________________________________________

be·lov·ed [bih-luhv-id, -luhvd] 

adjective
1. greatly loved; dear to the heart.
noun
2. a person, or in this case a game, that is greatly loved.

Origin:
1350–1400; Middle English biloved, past participle of biloven to like, love; see be-, love-ed.
____________________________________________________________

That is probably why one gamer made a federal case out of his crushing disappointment with the way that Mass Effect 3 ended -- literally -- filing a false advertising complaint with the Federal Trade Commission and following that up by filing an additional complaint against game publisher Electronic Arts with the Better Business Bureau.  Those gestures represent the literal tip of the iceberg, though they were widely covered by the news media mostly because, well, you don't take a game studio to task and demand that they change the ending to the game that they have already released in its finished form, do you?  Or do you?

Joining in the sentiments expressed by the gamer who filed the FTC complaint -- I don't know his real name but I do know that he goes by the tag "El Spiko" on the official BioWare forums (BioWare is the developing studio for the Mass Effect games) -- tens of thousands of gamers all over the world have joined in protests of varying forms with him, with gestures that span the to-be-expected angry posts to the official game forums to blog posts, emails, and complaints to radio call-in shows.  The strong dissatisfaction over the ending has been widely covered by the traditional games media TV shows like G4's Attack of the Show and X-Play, but it has also been covered by traditional news media, including TV, newspapers, and magazines, and not just in the USA.

The brilliant creators of the Penny Arcade comic strip helped to organize an official online protest called "Retake Mass Effect 3" that focused intense attention on BioWare and the unhappy ending of the game -- and it may well be that this played a key role in sparking off the fuse that lead to the unthinkable happening: BioWare blinked.
It seems that "Game Over" does not necessarily mean "Game Over" 
Mr. Gamer Goes to Washington... err... Edmonton, Alberta, Canada?
The debate is still raging online as to whether this is a good thing or a bad thing: in response to the massive protests and clearly unhappy fans, Mass Effect developer BioWare announced last week that it will be making available, for download by gamers -- probably as part of the next DLC offering for Mass Effect 3 -- a revised ending.

It would seem that the gamers who, so seriously upset by the endings that they got in the released game, have won their way, but have they really won?  Twisting the arm of the developing studio to the point at which they may significantly alter the ending -- or at least one of the three possible endings -- basically means that through protest the fans of a game have changed the story in the game and, in the process, have fiddled with what amounts to the freedom to tell a story by the writers who created it, the dev team that coded it, and the artists who rendered it.

Imagine for a moment that the fans of the Harry Potter series, furious over the death of their beloved Headmaster and Professor Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore (who you likely are aware died under mysterious circumstances at the hands of Professor Snape that later turned out to be something other than it at first seemed), undertook such a protest and were successful to the point that, rather than his life being ended by the dreaded Avada Kedavra, was instead pushed down the stairs of the Astronomy Tower, causing him to hit his head and become comatose rather than dying?

Clearly if you know the story it would have massively changed the entire tone of the book, and in so doing it would have -- just as it is doing with Mass Effect 3 -- compromised the artistic integrity of the writer and the story itself.  I assure you that I am not alone in that belief, though to be fair there are a lot of people out there who think that this sort of exchange of opinions -- even when it results in a developer changing its stance as is the case here, is a good thing for the industry.  I don't know about that...
Dumbledore Lives!

It's a Coin-toss...
During the Summer when I was seven-years-old we had an oval-shaped rug on the floor of our house on my mother's sheep station that was made of thick braided strands of wool sewn together and dyed in shades of grey, brown, and black, with a four-inch wide section of the black strands running around the middle of the rug in an oval shape that was reminiscent of a race track.  I am told that I spent hour after hour when the weather was not so good outside laying on that rug playing with the collection of Matchbox cars that I had inherited from the last two generations of men in my family...

It was on that imaginary track -- which I called the "Sheep Station 500" -- that I ran race after imaginary race.  The race cars all dated to the 1960's vintage Matchbox cars that previously belonged to my much older brothers, while the "support" vehicles were all 1950's vintage that had belonged to an uncle...  Every one of my cars had its own driver and mechanic, whose names I knew well, and every race there was a favorite to win -- and they usually did.  

The Top Five racers of the track and their cars were:
  •  Etienne and his Yellow Citroen
  •  Billy and his Blue Jaguar 3.4 Litre
  • Tommy and his White & Pink Ford Thunderbird
  • Scully and his Red Mercedes-Benz 220 SE
  • Harold and his White Ford Corsair
It probably will not surprise you that Harold and Billy usually vied for first and second place, while while third place was usually a toss-up.  Tommy tried, but his racing team did not have the budget to afford new parts and tyres so he was often knocked out of the race by flat tyres and bad luck with his spark plugs -- and bad boy Scully hardly ever placed higher than 4th because, well, he was the bloke that was usually responsible for Tommy getting knocked out of the race, and he tried to use his dirty tricks on Billy and Harold but they were too smart to fall for them!

Etienne never won -- ever -- but it serves him right for trying to race his wimpy French car against genuine Aussie racers!  
Harold's White Ford Corsair

For the first week or so there was a number of local and regional races -- I had over a hundred cars and trucks you see, so there had to be elimination races to determine who was going to race in the Grand Prix -- and there was plenty of work for the emergency and support crews at the track, who were equipped with a pair of Dennis Fire Trucks to race over and put out the odd engine fires, and a large red Esso petrol tanker that was called in to fuel up the cars before each race. 

Along the edges of the track in the pit areas were the Bedford Wreck Trucks that would haul off the disabled and wrecked cars when there was a pile-up at the wicked and deadly second turn, and of course the Track Manager's Land Rover and the Ford Anglia that was used by the official race judge Francis Dork --  you see I remember all of their names, what cars and trucks they drove, and even who they bet on to win the Grand Prix...  But you know I never did actually get to run the Grand Prix -- my mother tossed the rug out before it was held because it was old and ratty and she replaced it with a new rug that sadly lacked that well-defined track in the middle.  But that is not really why the race was never run...

By the time we got past the elimination heats and the Top Five racers were singled out, there was no point in running the race, was there?  It was already clear who was going to win, who would place, and which car would be pulling into the Winner's Circle to drink champagne and enjoy the adoration of the crowds in the stands that surrounded the track -- and what is the real point or enjoyment in knowing the outcome before it happens -- or more to the point, changing the outcome because you didn't like it?

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

. . . Time

"Both young children and old people have a lot of time on their hands. That's probably why they get along so well. " -- Jonathan Carroll

Among his many talents Jonathan Carroll is a novelist and author who is perhaps best known for his treatment of the subjects of magic, slipstream, and modern fantasy.  He knows a thing or two about the problem presented by time, though to some degree we all do, right?

No writer -- at least no freelancer -- complains about not having time with any seriousness to the complaint, because not having time means that they are working -- that they are earning...  And that is not a subject that freelance writers joke about.

I just wish that there was a way to obtain more time...  Or swap the free time that is available in the middle of Summer with the times in the Winter when there is not enough time.

Time Travel Happens . . 

The idea of time travel has been a staple for science fiction and fantasy writers since the genres were invented -- and maybe even before that.  

The Time Machine by H. G. Wells is often the first story that comes to mind when the subject is raised, and it is a great story that arguably was created by a writer who was way before his time.  Then there is the classic novel Bid Time Return by Richard Matheson that was turned into a movie called Somewhere in Time (that starred Christopher Reeves) which was a good one.

My all time favorite time travel novels have to be Time and Again by Jack Finney, and Robert Heinlein's The Door Into Summer, a story whose protagonist, an engineer named Daniel Boone Davis, has a pet cat who is also his best friend (named Petronius the Arbiter) who features rather prominantly in both the plot and the endearing quality of the story.  In fact it is fair to say that the observation by Heinlein's wife Ginny that prompted him to write the story was, more or less, about that cat.

I cannot read that book without getting near tears at Heinlein's description of the emotional crisis that the cat, Pete, is thrown into when the protagonist is placed in a position beyond Pete's ability to either rationalize or deal with -- which leaves him with only the option to cry.

Heinlein belongs in a very exclusive group of writers whose ability to cause you to think without realizing you are doing so, while they take contemporary issues and wrap them in the thin veil of the story that they are telling, is so powerful a gift that we should consider ourselves fortunate that these men and women chose to tell stories as writers rather than to enter the field of politics, where their natural talents would have easily permitted them to manipulate not just the system, but each and every one of us as individuals.

. . . Just Ask the Experts
 
As the plot to a novel time travel is an interesting concept, but the idea that it could actually be possible strikes most intelligent people as not simply unlikely, but when the notion is being presented by another (presumably) smart person, a primary tip-off that the person doing the talking is trying to sell you something.

That being the case it is not really all that surprising to me that there is a decided reluctance on the part of some of the smartest people in the world alive today to admit that they believe time travel is possible.  In fact it happens all the time.  Every day.  Right now.  Says who?

How about Dr. Stephen Hawking?

While he is reluctant to discuss the matter because, as he points out, invariably the listener will grasp at much of the hypothesis and apply it to elements of the notion that for personal reasons they want to believe, that sort of conversation rarely ends well or heads in the direction that was intended.  That is an irrational but predictable given...

So what do people like Hawking mean when they say that time travel is possible?

If you apply the very strictest sense of what is and is not observable phenomenon, every time you look at a star you are traveling in time, because what you are seeing is an event that is thousands -- and in some cases perhaps millions -- of years old.  That it is happening right now but originally occurred all that time ago certainly meets with the generally accepted definitions of time travel, right?

If you got into a space ship (whose technology we do not at present possess) and headed out into space at, say, twice the speed of light, and you traveled for a good long time, if you then stopped and you tuned your television receiver to the right frequency, you could watch the live broadcast of Elvis Presley appearing on the Ed Sullivan Show.  Or you could perhaps tune your radio to the right frequency and listen as Adolf Hitler gave his opening address to the world while standing at the podium of the 1936 Summer Olympic Games in Berlin...  That would qualify as time travel wouldn't it?  After all, they are both live broadcasts...

. . . Observers and Participants . . .

Albert Einstein (14 March 1879 – 18 April 1955) hinted that time had many aspects, and that the passage of time and actual events were more relative to the observer rather than the participant, since the observer could see elements of a tableau that were concealed from the participant.  That is an over-simplification of what he actually said, the details of which include speed, the sun, the nature of the physics of time, and some very complicated mathematical formula I do not even pretend to understand because hey, I don't.

What I do understand is that there are things Einstein daydreamed about that are way out of reach for me even when I am focusing upon and concentrating upon an idea.  I am just saying...

One of the examples of how Einstein's daydreams often turn out to be realistic assessments of actual phenomenon is the International Space Station (commonly called the "ISS" by the smart people at NASA).  As part of my job as a newspaper columnist who writes about business and technology I have the occasion to learn things that most people do not.  For example when there was a problem with the ISS, I spent a few weeks learning about it as I followed the developments that, fortunately, turned out to be much ado about nothing.  

The disaster was not a disaster, nothing bad happened, and so there was really nothing to write about but -- and this I think of as the cool bit in all of this -- I walked away from the experience having been briefed by some of the smartest people in the world including NASA engineers whose business it is to operate and fix the ISS, and now know a lot about it.  Cool that.
For example I know that the COSPAR ID for the ISS is "1998-067A" -- and I know that a COSPAR ID is the International Designator -- also known as COSPAR designation -- which is the international naming convention that is used for satellites, the ISS being technically a satellite.  

Naming things is an important task, especially things that go up into space with the potential for coming back down to earth, since you have to fill out insurance forms when your roof is destroyed by an object falling out of the sky and insurance companies like it better when you can say "pieces from the object formerly known as 1998-067A re-entered the atmosphere and struck my roof,  destroying it," rather than "this big metallic thing that is I know not what came from I know not where and crushed my roof; and now I need you to fix it please, thank you!"

A working example -- in fact the very example that the NASA engineer used in explaining the convention to us at the briefing, is object "1990-037B," which translates to the Hubble Space Telescope.  That happened to be the 37th known successful launch world-wide in 1990, and you may be interested to know that actor and comedian Jack Black's mother is Dr. Judith Cohen-Black, is an engineer who worked extensively on the Hubble Space Telescope Project.  Isn't it a small world?

The official Radio Call Sign for the ISS is Alpha, and it has a maximum crew compliment of six people.  Its Operational Window is roughly the years 1998 to 2016 but it is possible according to the experts to extend that by affixing booster motors to the ISS changing its orbit to a higher one to correct the roughly 2km a month that it degrades (falls) which would have the effect of allowing it to stay up there longer.  Of course doing that would require dis-assembly of much of the external structure such as the solar power arrays and other stuff so it is not likely.  But they could do it if they wanted to...

The ISS has an approximated mass of around 450,000 kg (990,000 lb), a length of 72.8 m, and a width 108.5 m.  Its height c. 20 m (c. 66 ft), and its pressurised volume 837 m3 (29,600 cu ft), and it has an atmospheric pressure 101.3 kPa (29.91 inHg, 1 atm).  The most important fact for the purposes of this article is the fact that its average speed is  7,706.6 m/s (27,743.8 km/h, 17,239.2 mph) allows it to orbit the planet every 91 minutes.

This is important because it demonstrates another aspect of time travel Hawking talked about -- the fact that wristwatches worn by astronauts who spend time on the ISS lose time uniformly -- that is to say at the exact same and identical rate, which is proof that time for the people on the ISS passes slower than time on the surface of the planet, so you could say that the astronauts are traveling backwards in time every time they visit the ISS. 

I need to go now, I am out of time...