To this day, that remains one of my favorite Halloween costumes of all time.

To be fair, the costume was so unwieldy that I couldn’t move my arms much while wearing it, and when I fell over I looked like Ralphy’s brother from “A Christmas Story” trying to get back on my feet again — but when all the other kids were wearing off-the-rack plastic He-Man costumes, this one stood out as a true original.

Gaze upon the face of Pac-Man fever:

So hey, happy birthday and thanks for the great costume, Mom.

There is a lot written about both bills by some very intelligent, thoughtful, and logical people, so I’m not going to regurgitate all of the specifics here.

What I will say, however, is that both of these bills are among the most dangerous pieces of legislation aimed at the Internet during my lifetime. If they are passed in their current forms, they put control over which websites exist and the content those websites are allowed to run in the hands of the largest media companies.

Basically, if a media company doesn’t like what you linked to (and that’s just linking to something, not uploading it yourself), it can shut you down.

And while the politicians and corporations supporting SOPA and PIPA will tell you that’s not the intent of the legislation, it is part of the legislation. And let’s be honest — if the option is not only offered but protected in the bills, it will be used.

So today, while you’re encountering one website after another that’s been “blacked out” in protest of SOPA and PIPA, take a few minutes to read up on the bills and understand why there’s so much opposition to them.

Here are a few places to start:

“How PIPA and SOPA Violate White House Principles Supporting Free Speech and Innovation” – EFF.org

“SOPA and PIPA – Learn More” – Wikipedia

“More about SOPA and PIPA” – Google.com

And here’s a great video created by ForTheFuture.org that explains both bills:

PROTECT IP / SOPA Breaks The Internet from Fight for the Future on Vimeo.

And keep in mind that this isn’t the last you’re going to hear about either of these bills. Even if both pieces of legislation get dropped from the table today, next week, or next month, the amount of money being pushed into politicians’ pockets by media companies ensures that these bills will be a recurring threat to everything we love about the ‘net — so spread the word.

Oh, and one final reminder, folks: This isn’t some granola-fueled, kumbaya-singing protest of a restaurant that doesn’t offer vegan-friendly dining options. (No offense to my vegan readers. I love all of you and your delicious brownies.) This is a protest of legislation that threatens our ability to watch (and tell the world about) hilarious remixes of ’80s cartoons and awesome fan-made movies about characters that would never appear together on the same screen.

Got your attention now? Well then, to arms!

Still, “a bit punchy” is better than “excruciating pain that makes me wish for a quick death,” which is how I felt after my last wisdom tooth extraction.

I had my first wisdom tooth pulled earlier this year, and the process was one of the most painful experiences I’ve ever endured. Over the years, I’ve fractured my skull and other bones, tore muscles, splashed acid on my skin, and even spilled a kettle of boiling water on what is best described as a very sensitive part of my body — and the pain I experienced during (and after) each of those events was nothing compared to my first tooth extraction.

Without getting into gruesome details, the procedure went a lot like this:

This time around, however, I opted for the full anesthesia experience (and a different surgeon) — and it was one of the best decisions I’ve ever made. Not only was I barely conscious for the extraction, but I traded 24 hours of fist-clenching, sob-inducing pain for 24 hours of painkiller-induced serenity.

Oh, and they also let me keep the tooth. (Jessica told me not to post a photo of it — or at the very least, wait until the painkillers wear off before deciding whether to post it. I think this is sage advice.)

So that’s why updates might be a little infrequent this week, folks.

Yes, in the absence of Superman, a blend of nitrous oxide, general anesthesia, and percocet will indeed get the job done.

Also, chalk this up as yet another situation that never came up when I worked in an outside office: the inability to properly use a mouse due to a cat being draped over my arm.

I have a lot of pet peeves when it comes to the airline industry, and one of them is the totally unnecessary requirement that passengers shut off all electronic items during takeoff and landing.

Not only is there no research to support the notion that using your smartphone during takeoff poses any danger, but if there was a potential safety risk, don’t you think the TSA would be all over it? I mean, this is the agency that has no qualms about blasting you with legitimately dangerous radiation for the protection of your fellow passengers.

Knowing that, it probably comes as no surprise that I enjoyed a recent post in the New York Times blog titled “Disruptions: Fliers Must Turn Off Devices, but It’s Not Clear Why.”

New technologies are often greeted with fear and that is certainly true of a disruptive technology like cellphones. Yet rules that are decades old persist without evidence to support the idea that someone reading an e-book or playing a video game during takeoff or landing is jeopardizing safety.

Nevertheless, Les Dorr, a spokesman for the F.A.A., said the agency would rather err on the side of caution when it comes to digital devices on planes.

He cited a 2006 study by the Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics, a nonprofit group that tests and reports on technical travel and communications issues. The group was asked by the F.A.A. to test the effects of cellphones, Wi-Fi and portable electronic devices on planes.

Its finding? “Insufficient information to support changing the policies,” Mr. Dorr said. “There was no evidence saying these devices can’t interfere with a plane, and there was no evidence saying that they can.”

Given that logic, I propose a ban on crying babies and loud snoring during flight. After all, there isn’t any evidence that crying babies or loud snoring doesn’t interfere with a plane, and there’s no evidence that they do, either.

So let’s err on the safe side and ban them entirely, okay?