In a few hours, I will finally, belatedly, receive my first smartphone. I’m salivating in anticipation. But I’ve hung onto my cheap, rocksolid LG “dumbphone” (ie, it calls, txts, takes photos, and that’s about it) for years, and not felt like I was missing much. Sure, it’s irritating not to be able to call up a map when I’m walking around, or check my email in an airport. But do I really NEED to be able to do those things, lest I dissolve into a steaming puddle of screaming goo like Stripe at the end of Gremlins? No.

So it was in that spirit that a few months ago I wrote a short piece for New York magazine reviewing the dumbest of the dumbphones, the Forrest Gump of telecommunication: the Jitterbug. (You know, that “cell phone for old people” you see advertised in in Parade magazine inserts.)

I used the thing as my primary cell for two whole weeks. My world did not end. In fact, there was plenty to like about it. Unfortunately, New York killed the review for space issues. So now, on the eve of my willing entry into the app-obsessed, always-on smartphone universe, I present: In Praise of the Dumbphone.

No apps. No GPS. No web, calendar or camera. The Samsung Jitterbug is the anti-smartphone, which is to say: dumb as a rock. And that’s the point.

Granted, the J’s bulky, blobby shape won’t turn heads. And with no T9 predictive spelling, text-messaging is crude at best. But there’s an odd freedom in embracing Jitterbug’s limitations. Let your friends Google that restaurant, find that showtime, read that map: when they figure things out, they’ve got your number.

Take that, Gizmodo.

I was just visiting my late-60’s-year-old mother, and (as usual) complaining to high heaven about the state of her digital/internet existence: an underpowered, beyond-obsolete eMac with a dialup internet connection. We started talking about what, in a perfect world, would be the best thing for her to upgrade to (besides cable internet, for god’s sake). As we have seen, “old people-optimized tech” is becoming quite the niche.

But when I thought frankly about it, I couldn’t help but think that perhaps the best computer for an aging person who “just wants something that works” isn’t a ruthlessly simplified internet appliance, but the exact opposite: a top of the line, specced-to-the-nines, more-horsepower-than-she’ll-ever-come-close-to-using desktop supercomputer.

Why? Isn’t all that expensive power just going to be “wasted” on someone like my mom?

Absolutely. And that’s the whole point.

In fact, the whole idea of modern computer interfaces is completely predicated on “wasting” formidable computing power on frivolous things like graphical user interfaces, onscreen animation, and eye candy of every sort. (You know, all the stuff that makes using your computer NOT require the intelligence of an astrophysicist and the temperament of an actuary.)

And if there’s anyone who needs a maximized amount of wasted power working in their favor, it’s a 66-year-old lady going on the internet. SO:

1. She should have the fastest processor that money can buy (within reason), to reduce lagging and latency to a point indistinguishable from zero. In fact, an overpowered processor is the perfect investment for a non-power-user, because it will ensure that any of the simple things she does with her computer for the next X years will still happen near-instantaneously long after her machine is technically obsolete. Also, as the internet continues to grow in sophistication, “simple things” will become more processor-intensive whether we like it or not.

2. She should be maxed out like a mothertrucker on RAM. Not because she’s going to be multitasking between Final Cut Pro and AfterEffects. Rather, because again, anything that happens instantly and seamlessly is one less thing for her to even THINK about when using her computer. Plus, old people are not geniuses with file management. They dump everything on their desktop so they don’t “lose” it and keep application windows open in perpetuity. Having more RAM than is humanly necessary will offset these bad habits and ensure that whatever memory-hungry applications might come down the pike in the next 5 years, she’ll always have more than enough to never see a spinning beach ball.

3. She should have a huge hard drive. Will my Mom be stocking up untold gigabytes of torrent files and lossless music? Of course not, but having a 1TB black hole inside her computer just means (again, are you seeing a pattern?) that she doesn’t have to think, choose, hem or haw in any way about saving things, ever. No matter how many baby pictures or videos of grandchildren get sent her way.

4. She should have the latest and greatest major OS. An old person’s computer should be a seamless link between them and the same robust digital “present tense” that the rest of the world is living in, especially their children and grandchildren. Custom OS’s like the one on the Litl or this new one are awesome in their own limited, circumscribed ways, but if few people are using them, that’s just another possible barrier for seamless communication (I think)–the elderly user gets pushed into a ghetto with different basic rules and tools than everyone else. At this point, is OS X or Windows 7 really that daunting on the surface? No. But they’re still flexible and powerful enough to handle whatever’s coming in the near future that might turn out to be as ubiquitous as Youtube or videochatting has. I don’t want to ever have to say to my Mom, “Ooh sorry, your computer can’t do that.”

What all this means is that if I had my druthers, I’d set my mom up with a rig that would blow my own current system out of the water, performance-wise. But that’s the thing: I’m going to own three or four new systems in the next ten years. My mom won’t, and shouldn’t have to.

Yikes, it’s been a whole year since I promised to overhaul this place in my last post. Guess that’s gonna be one of my 2010 resolutions.

I have actually been working on stuff, though. Here’s the latest and greatest: a short web documentary I produced for Nature.com, about a new technique for blocking traumatic memories.

(Yup, embedding vids in this theme still sucks. Gonna have to change that, along with everything else…)

I haven’t posted here in a while because I’ve been busy as hayell starting a company, launching two series, and doing work for the New York Times Magazine and the science journal Nature.

When I come up for air, I will make this place pretty again. Promise.

The Monitor hath returned from its summer hiatus with a vengeance. And explosions. And Michael Bay.

Yes, we used Michael Bay as a launchpad for science news. Watch the awesomeness in the righthand column.

It’s lovely what you can get away with when you own the joint. Like write posts whose voice (somewhat formal, snark-free) and content (eggheadish) is pretty much as mismatched to the rest of the site as humanly possible.

(Not that I mind seeing clear-headed science content on one of the internet’s most-read blogs. Hell, I’d rather read it there than here.)

Hey, all 13.5 people who read my blog… the weekly science-news show I produce, “The Monitor,” is losing its multitalented screencasting/mograph genius. I’ll miss ya, Mike.

So I need to hire someone to fill his shoes. (And just so we’re clear, by “hire” I mean “pay.”) My new ninja has to have mad editing skills, know video formats inside and out, be able to create, execute and assemble simple motion-graphics effects, and have at least a passing familiarity with the phenomenon of screencasting.

Interested? Know someone who might be? Get in touch ASAP.

Yup, I know I’m only the jillionth person to say that, but it’s kind of hard not to once you’ve seen it with your own eyes.

Here’s a photo set.

Tonight me and the lady are taking off for a ten-day vacation in Iceland and Paris. I’m bringing my iPod for airplane viewing, but other than that it will be a totally computer/internet-free stretch.

Pics and stuff when we get back…