You often refer to your self-perceived tiny span of attention, and ever since you first mentioned it, I wondered how much discipline one must have to dole out such well and - more astonishing - completely coherently written articles.
I may not fully comprehend what it means to be unable to focus on one particular subject for a long time, but I imagine it's a nightmare having to write a 40 pages script when dangling shiny objects might decide any time to become more fascinating.
Be honest, do you write stuff inside an airtight cardboard box to manage such magnificent feats?

Spock is definitely the character most like me. Kirk is the sort of person most likely to annoy me when I meet him in real life, too. But somehow it was all ok, and I was rooting for Kirk. Because it's Star Trek, I guess, and because certain things are just supposed to be.

they hooked you up with a typo: "duel nature"!

Matthew, that was a wonderful piece. Thank you for writing and sharing it.

Nice job Matthew. I love that you never fail to surprise me with your connections.
btw, LOVED your layer tennis commentary last week (? possibly further back my sense of time is screwy today!).

beautiful. i actually got a little weepy by the end. great piece, matthew.

I've always enjoyed your writing, but this is one of my favorite pieces ever. I immediately forwarded it to my whole mostly-functional family. Keep up the good work.

Matthew, it's good to see you on dy at least once in awhile. Nice article, thanks.

re: ASD, you might enjoy the book
The Speed of Dark

I have been reading your stuff for years and enjoying it without feeling a need to comment. I feel compelled to say to you now, nicely done.