HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal)
Subject: Re: Anyone heard of UK proposal to licence BBSes? - Must be stopped!
Organization: Cuddlehogs Anonymous
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 13:56:59 GMT

In article <1993Jan25.125851.22819@unipalm.co.uk> keith@unipalm.co.uk (Keith Mitchell) writes:
:On a related note, does anyone know if NCCL, or any organisations
:like it such as SCCL and Charter 88, have net access yet ? Much as I
:would like to sell them a PIPEX connection, I doubt it would be
:beyond their means. Perhaps some enterprising public access system
:out there would like to sell/donate them a connection or account ?

I think they could probablt afford a $400 pc, $200 modem, and a $10/mo
demon account.  The trick is finding someone computer-literate to use it.
And until we do, there's not much point in trying to interest them in
cyberspace stuff I guess.  Do we know any NCCL members who could (paper)
write in with the ELSPA/FAST info to find out if they're interested?

G


:Keith Mitchell                 (*not* representing PIPEX/Unipalm policy)
(Maybe I'd better start putting in a 'not a demon representative' disclaimer
given how much I've mentioned them lately ;-) )
From: Joe.Francis@dartmouth.edu (Joe Francis)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: What the State of Iowa is doing while EFF does the D.C. 
 shuffle
Date: 25 Jan 93 19:47:05 GMT
 <C1805L.6x7@news.iastate.edu> <1993Jan23.084718.4711@clarinet.com> 
 <C1E1xH.Cu@news.iastate.edu>  <1993Jan25.003229.69@cobra.dra.com>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0b7@newshost.dartmouth.edu

In article <C1E1xH.Cu@news.iastate.edu>, john@iastate.edu (John
Hascall) writes:
>It seems to have been not terribbly unwise to have (essentially) all the
>roads owned by the government -- what leads you to believe networks are
>different?

It's a difference of degree.  I believe that a government's interest in
network traffic will be higher than its interest in highway traffic. 
After we have a few more "Rodney Kings of the Internet", you may
conclude that government ownership is unwise after all.
From: lile@netcom.com (Lile Elam)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: ENOUGH! Re: BSDI/USL Lawsuit -- More Bad News for Human Beings...
Date: 27 Jan 93 07:00:47 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken) writes:

>In article <C1A118.2rs@jshark.inet-uk.co.uk> joe@jshark.inet-uk.co.uk (Joe Sharkey) writes:
>>
>>   USL has had some original ideas in the last 20 years.
>>

>Read about Multics, Paid for by the US taxpayer; BCPL, paid for by the
>British taxpayer. Should AT&T pay royalties for each use of a function
>switch in UNIX source? If we are going to have aggressive protection of
>property rights in software and software concepts, the taxpayers should, of
>course, get their share. Agreed? 

>BTW, UNIX was developed at AT&T while it was a federally mandated national
>monopoly. 


Good point. I seem to recall that at that time, AT&T couldn't make money
in the computer industry because of this. So prehaps this was one of
the reasons they were giving un*x to universities to develop and play
with.

I wonder if this means that AT&T is still not allowed to make a profit
from it because of it's origins. 

And I also hope that if AT&T or USL wins the case and lays claim to
un*x, that they have to pay all the money they earn in royalties to
the tax payers since it seems to have been funded by us. 

Hey, maybe they could help pay up the national debt! :)
I am sure this idea will make 'em drop it like a hot potato.

-lile
-- 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Lile Elam	    |  "Remember... No matter where you go, there you are."
lile@netcom.com     |		
Un*x Admin / Artist |			 Buckaroo Banzai
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: callahan@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: What the State of Iowa is doing while EFF does the D.C. shuffle
Date: 24 Jan 93 05:34:21 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAX 6620

In article <C1805L.6x7@news.iastate.edu>, john@iastate.edu (John Hascall) writes:
> Here is a brief sketch of what the State of Iowa is currently doing.
> 
> The Iowa Communications Network is a network of fiber being laid
> to a `point of presence' in each of Iowa's 99 (rather smallish)
> counties.  From there, connections will be made to each of the
> 3 State Universities, the dozen or so Community colleges, and other
> interested private colleges.  Then connections are envisioned to
> all (~500) public school systems.  Then connections to the state's
> public libraries (roughly another 500).  Also connecting will be
> various state agencies and interested companies.

Fascinating.  Could you tell us more about the technical details?
What speed are these links, what kind of traffic do they/will they
carry, what are they used for?

> John Hascall                   ``An ill-chosen word is the fool's messenger.''
> Systems Software Engineer
> Project Vincent
> Iowa State University Computation Center  +  Ames, IA  50011  +  515/294-9551

Michael
---
Michael Callahan
callahan@vax.ox.ac.uk
callahan@math.harvard.edu
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: tk0jut1@mp.cs.niu.edu (jim thomas)
Subject: Re: New case for EFF, ACLU, and CPSR
Organization: Northern Illinois University
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 22:49:02 GMT

In article <1993Jan25.184159.10827@netcom.com> nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle) writes:
>      I'm suprised the EFF is exercised about this.  The people involved
>seemed to have been doing something legal, but stupid, in a private mall,
>and they were hassled, but not arrested or injured.  What's the big deal?
>

Reporter Brock Meeks has the mall's director of security on tape claiming
that the disruption was instigated by the U.S. Secret Service. Comments by
the Secret Service do not challenge the statements. The "big deal" is the
possible USSS involvement, which, if true, strikes some as a serious abuse
of their power and possible violation of law.

Jim Thomas
From: phardie@nastar.uucp (Pete Hardie)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Sofware as Engineering
Date: 20 Jan 93 16:54:13 GMT
Organization: Digital Transmission Systems, Duluth, GA.

In article <1993Jan19.125058.1141@uoft02.utoledo.edu> jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner) writes:
>osmosis isn't 100% accurate, but it's close. CS stuff is easily 
>learned by doing it, or being around it so much that you get a feel 
>for what's going on. ("Read the source, Luke.") classes really aren't 
>necessary. i wanted to write an expression evaluator. i found out 
>about stacks. i puzzled over how to create a dynamic database. i read 
>up on linked lists & hashing. then i get to a data structures class & 
>what are they teaching? now i'm taking an intro systems class & have 
>already done everything on the syllabus.

You must be an exception, because I've seen a majority of non-CS people
writing BAD code, except those whose degrees weren`t CS, but whose classes
were. [Ga Tech just recently acknowledged that CS is a 'real' discipline]

>now i'm hardly -proficient- at some of this stuff, so the classes 
>aren't a waste. but an engineer would be getting experience anyway, 
>so it's completely conceivable that they could pick up on programming 
>with a bit of effort and -no- classes.

Conceivable, perhaps.  Likely?  Not if my experience is any guide.  People
who are not in a class tend to learn the minimum necessary to 'do the job',
at the time, and usually can't go back and redo things when they learn the
better methods.


-- 
Pete Hardie:  phardie@nastar  (voice) (404) 497-0101
Digital Transmission Systems, Inc., Duluth GA
Member, DTS Dart Team           |  cat * | egrep -v "signature virus|infection" 
Position:  Goalie               |
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: gardner@convex.com (Steve Gardner)
Subject: Re: Conflict of interest?
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 15:56:18 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In article <C1E6Du.51r@panix.com> sbarber@panix.com (Steve Barber) writes:
>Re: conversation about S 893 and EFF's decision not to get involved.
>This new law makes just about everyone
>I know into a felon.  Most of them are good people.  It seems absurd.
>The law ought not be absurd.  This goes straight to the heart of
>"ordered liberty" and a broad conception of civil rights, even if it
>does not fit neatly into existing civil libertarian categories.
	Remember when everyone is a felon then no one is a felon.
	They cannot and will not lock up everyone (regardless of how
	attractive that might seem to people with a law enforcement
	mindset).  What you are  describing is a classic case of a law that 
	technology outmoded. The copyright laws were outmoded in a similar 
	way by xerography.  The law was obsolete and it was changed.


>If I ever firm up these ideas, I'll let you all know.  Right now I
>just have a queasy stomach about the whole thing.
	Cheer up!  I'm looking forward to the time when the average
	Joe in the street realizes the fact that the majority of 
	laws are written to protect those with power from those
	without it.  The 80s were a great time for the elites, they managed 
	to convince the majority that their rapaciousness and greed were 
	good for the nation.  The majority even elected a smiling buffoon of 
	a president that fostered the looting of the treasury while convincing
	the majority that America was "standing tall" as a result.  The 
	backlash should	be interesting. What will happen when the average guy 
	catches on to the fact that the elites have always seen the law as an 
	instrument to control the average man and not as something they 
	(the elites) should take seriously.  How much longer will the average 
	guy take any law seriously?  
	

							smg
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: jthomas@kolanut.mitre.org (Joe Thomas)
Subject: Re: New case for EFF, ACLU, and CPSR
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 15:35:50 GMT

In article <1347@eplunix.UUCP> raoul@eplunix.UUCP (Nico Garcia) writes:
> In article <1993Jan23.034834.8869@mp.cs.niu.edu>,
> tk0jut1@mp.cs.niu.edu (jim thomas) writes:
> > 
> > In article <JMC.93Jan22123256@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU  
writes:
> >>Please explain what the computer enthusiasts were doing that aroused
> >>the suspicions or ire of these authorities, justified or not.
> > 
> > No one is withholding information. This incident has been widely 
> > discussed since early November (see, e.g., CuD 4.57). The
> 
> What is "withheld" is that the magazine mentioned, which the kids  
apparently
> read and which was the mutual interest of the kids present, is called  
"2600".
> The original article said "... 2600 magazine readers...." "2600" is
> apparently a hackers' magazine (yes, I use the common newer meaning of
> hacker here, not the original one).
> 
> Someone who's read an issue might volunteer more details? I don't even know
> if it's paper or on-line.

I'm sure I'll end up being the twentieth person to post this information, but  
2600 is a paper mag that's been published for years by Emmanuel Goldstein.   
It was originally mostly phone-phreaking info (2600 Hz is the frequency blue  
boxes use to jump onto trunks).  I agree that this whole thing is chilling.

Joe
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: jem@sunSITE.unc.edu (Jonathan Magid)
Subject: Re: Steve Jackson Games trial
Organization: University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 08:40:55 GMT

In article <1993Jan28.072501.29209@netcom.com> strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:
>
>Mike Godwin says the law requires that law enforcement use subpoenas rather
>than search warrants to obtain information from publishers.
>
>This is very interesting. How is "publisher" defined? Is a BBS which carries 
>"editorials" a publisher? Does a publisher have to produce and circulate
>paper copies?

Umm. Steve Jackson Games is indeed a publisher, whether the BBS is a
"printing press" or not.  They publish a series of role playing or adventure
games known as GURPS.

These are printed on paper in a method that would be somewhat recognizable
to Benjamin Franklin (who probably would want a laserprinter if he
could have one).

The question of whether email etc is publishing is important, but irrelevant
to the fact that the law requires a subpoena to search a publisher.

"not a lawyer, and i don't even own a television"
jem.

-- 
Jonathan Magid     jem@sunSITE.unc.edu       sunSITE Administrator
Virtual pizza Delivery (tm)::faxed in 30 cycles or less or you get it
----------------------------------------FREE!!!-----------------------
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
Subject: Re: EFF and its growing pains...
Originator: mnemonic@eff.org
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 04:34:29 GMT

In article <BETSYS.93Jan22140243@ra.cs.umb.edu> betsys@cs.umb.edu (Elizabeth Schwartz) writes:
>Ok, then , I'm confused. What exactly is your Open Systems initiative
>advocating? The paper talks about how "we must build...a nationwide
>structure." It says this repeatedly. Are you just cheerleading or are
>you advocating spending government money somewhere?

Are these the only possible choices?

Has it occurred to you that one thing the government can do that doesn't
involve spending government money is breaking the regulatory gridlock that
slows investment in infrastructure?


--Mike



-- 
Mike Godwin,    |"I'm waiting for the one-man revolution
mnemonic@eff.org| The only one that's coming."
(617) 864-0665  |                           
EFF, Cambridge  |                   --Robert Frost 
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,uk.net
From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Subject: Re: More Info To Come on EFF Shortly
Organization: The World
	<CKD.93Jan21114801@loiosh.eff.org> <1993Jan21.202856.12057@netcom.com>
Distribution: inet
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 01:26:33 GMT


From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) [responding to Chris Davis]
>>CIX-connected networks only use "subsidized facilities" if talking to
>>organizations on the subsidized portions of the network.  It is quite
>>possible for a CIX-connected network not to be advertised outside the CIX,
>>so that they *can't* accidentally cross, say, the NSF-funded backbone.
>>(Heck, just ask Barry Shein, that's the situation he was in for a long time.)
>
>Am I going blind in my old age, or do I see a lot of electronic mail, as
>well as newsgroups, that are partly handled over subsidized facilities?

Electronic mail and newsgroups are generally exempted from that
consideration because, owing to their store and forward nature, tend
to work well enough for many people's purposes over two tin cans and a
waxed string. It's still a lot faster and cheaper than, say, the
postal system etc. The NSF and other nets have generally exempted such
traffic on the grounds of mutual exchange (i.e. when e-mail is sent
it's not clear who's purpose is being served, the sender or the
recipient.) But that's sort of irrelevant to the issue, let's get back
to it...

Although your argument of subsidized facilities has a superficial ring
of truth to it I don't think it would bear close investigation. The
cost of replacing the whole NSFnet backbone by private concerns would
have a relatively tiny impact on most end users in terms of cost, if
any. This is not to say it was a mistake for the fed to do what they
did in the first place. It was not, it was the only way to get it
going I suspect and was a wonderful thing.

However, it's not at all clear to what extent the subsidy, by
prohibiting commercial use, has in fact now begun to make the whole
thing more expensive. I don't know. I do know that much commercial TV
and radio comes to me for free, while the publicly funded equivalents
always seems to be desparate for my money even though they receive
about $1B/year from the fed, as an apt analogy.

It's just not that simple, and I don't suggest that I am suggesting an
answer above, just shooting holes in the very notion that anyone thus
far understands the matter. I guess my point is that any consideration
has to carefully take many facts into balance. Facile arguments won't
do it.

-- 
        -Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die    | bzs@world.std.com          | uunet!world!bzs
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202        | Login: 617-739-WRLD
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: Steve Jackson Games trial
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 07:25:01 GMT


Mike Godwin says the law requires that law enforcement use subpoenas rather
than search warrants to obtain information from publishers.

This is very interesting. How is "publisher" defined? Is a BBS which carries 
"editorials" a publisher? Does a publisher have to produce and circulate
paper copies?

Dunno how the SJG trial is going to come out, but if a precedent were
established that BBs are publishers, as long as they carry "articles" as
well as "letters" then would that end seizures of BBS computers?

David
	
-- 
David Sternlight
RIPEM Public Key on server  --  Consider it an envelope for your e-mail

Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: dhd@exnet.co.uk (Damon)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,uk.net
Subject: Re: Anyone heard of UK proposal to licence BBSes? - Must be stopped!
Date: 25 Jan 93 20:13:31 GMT
Organization: ExNet Systems Ltd Public Access News, London, UK

In article <C1ExF0.9I4@demon.co.uk> gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal) writes:
>In article <1993Jan25.125851.22819@unipalm.co.uk> keith@unipalm.co.uk (Keith Mitchell) writes:
>:On a related note, does anyone know if NCCL, or any organisations
>:like it such as SCCL and Charter 88, have net access yet ? Much as I
>:would like to sell them a PIPEX connection, I doubt it would be
>:beyond their means. Perhaps some enterprising public access system
>:out there would like to sell/donate them a connection or account ?
>
>I think they could probablt afford a $400 pc, $200 modem, and a $10/mo
>demon account.  The trick is finding someone computer-literate to use it.
>And until we do, there's not much point in trying to interest them in
>cyberspace stuff I guess.  Do we know any NCCL members who could (paper)
>write in with the ELSPA/FAST info to find out if they're interested?

I've already spoken to them and offered them a few months free so they
can poke around and see what it's all about.

I gave them my opinion of what it seems FAST is trying to do,
overbearing and nannying if not more sinister, and they did seem to
agree it sounded a bit OTT.

They seem undecided if it's worthwhile their campaining on the issue, and
therefore whether or not it's worthwhile them playing with the technology.

But they are going to get back to me over the next couple of days and
I'll let the net know.  B^>

Damon
-- 
Damon Hart-Davis        d@hd.org   London UK   Tel/Fax: +44 81 755 0077  [1.37]

Two separate jobs, two employers: (1) Editor of Parallelogram, (2) Consultant
and seller of uucp news/mail feeds (UK#5 pcm, FIRST MONTH FREE) and cheap Suns.
From: sean@cobra.dra.com
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: EFF and its growing pains...
Date: 25 Jan 93 20:56:24 CST
Organization: Data Research Associates, Inc.

In article <1993Jan25.185826.12667@netcom.com>, strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:
> The discussion isn't about lighthouses. That's just the name given to the
> argument. The argument is about cases where the public benefits for
> something are much greater than the public costs, and the private sector
> won't do it alone, usually because the private sector cannot capture the
> benefits and charge enough for them to recover costs.

Ok, I've found the references.  Ronald Coase, Nobel laureate in Economics
in 1991, wrote a nifty little paper called "The Problem of Social Cost"
some number of years ago (I believe in the 1960's).  _The Economist_
recently did a review of the paper in the Febuary 23, 1991 issue called
"Of bees and lighthouses (ananlysis of the paper `The problem of Social
Cost' by Ronald Coase"

Ok, enough background, I'll cut to the chase

From the Economist:

"The Coase Theorem and the further work it inspired have demolished the
presumption that externalities and public goods automatically call for
government intervention."

I would recommend interested people read the Economist article.  It is an
excellent rebuttal to almost everything David has said in his article.  The
Economist is available in electronic format, or at better libraries everywhere.
-- 
Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO
Domain: sean@sdg.dra.com, Voice: (Work) +1 314-432-1100
From: jfw@neuro.duke.edu (John F. Whitehead)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: WIRED - new magazine dealing with technology and where it's going
Date: 21 Jan 93 21:17:37 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

Does anyone know WIRED's publisher's address or phone number, so I
can get my local bookstore to carry it?

-- 
 ________________________________________________________________________
|   John      jfw@neuro.duke.edu          Duke University Medical Center |
| Whitehead   jfw@well.sf.ca.us           Department of Neurobiology     |
|________________________________________ Durham, North Carolina ________|
From: amonson@crow.csrv.uidaho.edu (Paul Amonson)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: EFF and its growing pains...
Date: 27 Jan 93 07:11:58 GMT
Article-I.D.: moscow.C1I400.n35
Organization: University Of Idaho.
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

Mike Godwin (mnemonic@eff.org) wrote:
: In article <1993Jan18.234446.16683@clarinet.com> brad@clarinet.com (Brad Templeton) writes:

: >You'll find this more common than you think, John.   I know that at EFF
: >booths, when the bumper stickers are put out, the "ISDN: Make it so"
: >bumper sticker seems to lag the pack by quite a bit.

: They did okay at InterOp, Brad. And other bumperstickers that did better
: also implied infrastructure issues: "I'd rather be telecommuting," for
: example.

: --Mike

: -- 
: Mike Godwin,    |"I'm waiting for the one-man revolution
: mnemonic@eff.org| The only one that's coming."
: (617) 864-0665  |                           
: EFF, Cambridge  |                   --Robert Frost 

--
Does anyone know where to get the narrow bandwidth ISDN specs.  I have a lot
of questions and this seems the easist way to find out.  I would prefer a
electronic version via gopher or ftp.  Thanks in advance.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Amonson
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
US Mail:	University of Idaho
		PSES Department
		Moscow, ID   83843
Phone:		(208) 885-5996 M-F 8:30am to 3:30pm
e-mail:		amonson@crow.csrv.uidaho.edu
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk