HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ozzy@tcs.com (Pierre Osborne)
Subject: Re: InterNET access outside university sites in Calgary
Organization: Teknekron Communications, Inc
Distribution: canada
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 18:01:04 GMT

In article <1dql9bINNi2b@iskut.ucs.ubc.ca>, rkoo@unixg.ubc.ca (Richard W Koo) writes:
|> 
|> Hey folks!  Got a quick question about iNET access in Calgary.  I have a 
|> friend who can't get access to the iNET system from the University of Calgary,
|> (mainly because they won't let him get an account unless he takes a Comp Sci.
|> course first).  Anyhow, I was wondering if there are any private boards in
|> the Calgary region that serve as gateways to the network.  Any help would be
|> appreciated.  Thanks.

Richard,
    A few days ago I read about FidoNet having access to internet. FidoNet is
an application used to manage a BBS. There are hundreds of these in Canada. 
Here are a few news groups were you can get more info: comp.org.fidonet and 
fidonet.filk. 

There normal is a small fee to support the operation costs.

Ozzy
Bell Canada
@ Berkeley, California
From: andy-w@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Andrew webster)
Newsgroups: can.general
Subject: Freenet > HOW SOON TILL IT HITS EDMONTON?
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 19:29:01 MST
Organization: Edmonton Remote Systems #3, Edmonton, AB, Canada

WHEN IS THE FREE NET COMMING TO EDM....
SOUNDS INTERESTING...

FOR THE MASSES, EH!!

Andrew webster              andy-w@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca 
Newsgroups: can.general
From: dfs@doe.carleton.ca (David F. Skoll)
Subject: Re: Why aren't things like plutonium shipments kept secret?
Organization: Dept. of Electronics, Carleton University
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 21:02:13 GMT

In <1dp5hiINNfaa@iskut.ucs.ubc.ca> leffler@physics.ubc.ca (Steve
Leffler ) writes:

>It was inevitable that the story would leak anyway.

Nice phrasing.  Let's hope it's only the story that leaks. :-) or :-(.

--
David F. Skoll
Newsgroups: can.general,bc.general
From: klassen@sol.UVic.CA (Melvin Klassen)
Subject: FREE worldwide network access in Victoria
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, B.C. CANADA
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 20:41:49 GMT

(VIFA) VIctoria Free-net Association
c/o Vancouver Island Advanced Technology Centre
203-1110 Government Street
Victoria, British Columbia  V8W 1Y2
(604) 384-2450   FAX: (604) 384-8634  <VIFA@CUE.BC.CA>

Come and hear about B.C.'s first Free-net, cybercasting and the Internet

Dr. Tom Grundner, originator of the Free-Net concept,
founder of the first Free-Net in Cleveland, Ohio,
will help launch the Victoria Free-Net.

November 16, 8:00 p.m., Ramada Inn, 3020 Blanshard Street

Admission by donation.

Free-Nets are funded by grants and donations from corporations,
foundations, private citizens and government.  The VIFA is applying
for registration as a non-profit society.

(The Cleveland Freenet can be reached by modem: (216) 368-3888,
or by TELNET-ing to 'FREENET-IN-A.CWRU.EDU'.)
Newsgroups: can.general,comp.compression,comp.multimedia,comp.org.ieee,ieee.announce
From: ttwong@cucs18.cs.cuhk.hk (Wong tien Tsin)
Subject: Re: SMPTE Conference Announcement
Keywords: SMPTE, Engineering, Motion Pictures, Television, Multimedia, HDTV, Toronto
Organization: Faculty of Engineering, The Chinese U. of Hong Kong
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 13:27:39 GMT

Is there another way for oversea people to buy a copy of conference
proceeding without entering the conference?


Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: pat@frumious.uucp (Patrick Smith)
Subject: Re: Voting Systems (was Re: Proportional representation)
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 23:02:37 GMT
Reply-To: uunet.ca!frumious!pat
Organization: None

mathew@unixg.ubc.ca (Mathew B Englander) writes:
|This theorem was discovered by Kenneth Arrow (or Kevin Archer? ...
|
|His five axioms for a method
|of social choice (expressed here in the language of voting systems),
|according to my memory, are:
...
|5. A system that would choose one candidate over a second, and that second
|	candidate over a third, should also choose the first candidate
|	over the third.

Unfortunately, in real life the voters are not constrained to
follow this axiom.  Consider the example Matthew posted earlier:

|        Group I: 150 voters, whose ordered preference is A, B, C
|        Group II: 100 voters,  "      "        "      "  A, C, B
|        Group III: 200 voters, "      "        "      "  B, C, A
|        Group IV: 225 voters,  "      "        "      "  C, A, B.

In a one-on-one contest between A and B, the majority of voters
prefer A.  Between B and C, the majority prefers B.  But between
A and C, the majority prefers C.

-- 
Patrick Smith
uunet.ca!frumious!pat
pat%frumious.uucp@uunet.ca
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz
Subject: Re: German MMP Likely for New Zealand (was Re: Prop. rep.)
Organization: Actrix Information Exchange
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 01:01:53 GMT

In article <92313.1825132893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> writes:
> There are two systems I like, the first is the transferable ballot where
> voters list there 1st, 2nd and 3rd choices. First choices are counted on the
> first count, then if no one receives 50% the lowest candidate is dropped and
> the second choices of his/her voters are distributed and so on until someone
> gets 50%.  Another alternative is a run-off, a week or two later between the
> top two candidates.
> 
> The German system combines PR with a constituency system. Their is a two part
> ballot, on the first part you vote for a party, on the second part you vote
> for your constituency MP. Half the seats of the House (applying it to a
> Canadian structure) would be made up of constituencey MPs. The other half
> would be distributed to the various parties receiving more than 5% of the
> vote in such a way that the OVER ALL composition of the House is proportional
> to the votes each party recieves. For example, say there's an election where
> the Liberals win all the constituency seats with 50% of the vote (as happened
> in New Brunswick a few years ago) with the Tories and NDP getting 30% and
> 20% respectively. A 100 seat House would look like this

In 1986, a Royal Commission set up to look into ways of improving New
Zealand's electoral system unanimously endorsed the German system (MMP) in a
slightly modified form for implementation in here.
 
The politicians tried to bury the recommendation - because the two-party club
was threatened by it. But after much agitation, we finally has a referendum on
changing the voting system. 
 
88% of New Zealand voters voted for the two forms of PR on offer in a
multiple-choice ballot. MMP won 70% overall support. 
 
Support for the implementation of MMP has increased since the referendum and
it appears likely that the second referendum - between MMP and the present
system  at the 1993 elections - will be decide on MMP. 
 
The 1993 elections are likely to be the last under the first-past-the-post
system held in New Zealand. 
 
It took over 20 years of agitation by reformers to get to this point - and new
Zealand is a small country. Any move to PR in Canada would be a fight NOT for
the faint of heart.
 
Steve  (one who knows).
 

-- 
Steve Withers - Wellington, New Zealand | On Sept. 19th, 88% of NZ voters opted
Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz         | for proportional representation. It
withers_s@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz            | looks like we may get a more  
**** Happy user of OS/2 v2!! ****       | democratic system "real soon now".
Xref: sparky can.general:5297 can.politics:9452 soc.culture.canada:8371
From: mathew@unixg.ubc.ca (Mathew B Englander)
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Voting Systems (was Re: Proportional representation)
Date: 8 Nov 1992 00:37:22 GMT
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
NNTP-Posting-Host: unixg.ubc.ca

David R. Tucker extends my hypothetical example to see
what would happen in the First-Past-the-Post system, and
asks if there's any system that's better than those two.

Ross Wetmore recommends STV, and says that proportional-
representation voting systems tend to produce minority
governments.

First let me point out that STV is usually considered a
form of PR, even though it strictly is not. I prefer
the party list (PL) system, which *does* provide true PR. Of
course it has its disadvantages. PL is
used by some Scandinavian and northwest-European countries
to elect their parliaments. It usually produces stable govern-
ments there (e.g. the Netherlands, Sweden, Norway) but unstable
governments in other countries (e.g., Israel, Italy). Germany
uses a modified PL system. Of course, PL is not suitable for choosing a
party leader, or any post that requires just one person to fill it.

Let me put forward, for discussion, a new system, which I'll
call proportional probability, or PP. Its purpose is to choose
a person to fill a single post. It works as follows:

Any number of candidates are allowed. Every voter casts a ballot
for one candidate. Then all the ballots are put into a large vat
and one is chosen at random. Thus, each candidate's probability
of being elected is proportional to the number of votes s/he
receives.

For example, suppose in a small town approximately 40% of voters
are left-wing and 60% are right-wing, and suppose further that
this approximate split has been in place for several decades and
is likely to remain so. What happens under various voting systems
when this town elects its mayor, who is to serve a four-year term?

Under FPP, the mayor elected will almost always be right-wing. Under
a transferable-vote system, the mayor elected will *always* be
right-wing. Thus under either of those systems, 40% of the electorate
never, or hardly ever, gets represented by the mayor.

Under the proportional-probability system, however, over a large
number of elections there will be a left-wing mayor approximately
40% of the time, and a right-wing mayor the remaining years.

Let me emphasize that I don't necessarily advocate the PP system; I'd
be interested in comments on it though.

Mathew Englander.
Xref: sparky can.general:5279 rec.sport.baseball:32322 soc.culture.canada:8275
From: bob1@cos.com (Bob Blackshaw)
Newsgroups: can.general,rec.sport.baseball,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: The Upside-Down Canadian Flag
Date: 5 Nov 92 16:06:45 GMT
Organization: Corporation for Open Systems

In <skenny.720795434@femto.engr.mun.ca> skenny@pico.engr.mun.ca (Shawn Kenny) writes:

>rob@fosters.med.utah.edu (Rob Sargent) writes:


>>Don't ships use the Red Ensign, which has a union jack icon top right
>>on a red background?
>      ^^^
>white background, red cross I do believe.

That is if you are speaking of Navy ships. The merchant marine uses
the all-red background - unless of course they have changed in the
last few years.

>>rjs

b.
Newsgroups: can.general
From: drraymon@watdragon.uwaterloo.ca (Darrell Raymond)
Subject: Re: Why aren't things like plutonium shipments kept secret?
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 15:10:54 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.141735.11261@bcrka451.bnr.ca>, mennie@bcrki39.bnr.ca (Bill Mennie 3-4473) writes:
> 
> In spite of all the propaganda from the Canadian Nuclear Association and
> others of like mind, nuclear power and nuclear weapons programs have
> left a terrible legacy for future generations to deal with.  
>	.
>	.
> The burden of proof should be on the
> developers of potentially polluting or dangerous technologies to prove
> that they have solutions BEFORE such technologies are introduced on a
> massive scale. 
>	.
>	.
> The nuclear industry claims to have technical solutions
> and is frustrated by the politics of "not in my backyard".  These
> politics are just as real as the waste material and any acceptable
> solution must address them as well.  The former Soviet Union and India
> thought they could solve the political problem by pretending nothing was
> going on.  
>	.
>	.
> Before we started constructing breeder reactors, the public should have
> been told of the implications and asked, "Should they be permitted at
> all?"  If the answer was no, we would not be in this dilemma of already
> having produced the stuff.  If the answer was yes, then proper methods
> should be in place to guarantee safe, reliable handling and shipment. 

  I understand Bill's frustration and concern over the hazards of nuclear 
power.  But the idea that "we" could have "disallowed" this simply by being 
better informed at the beginning is too utopian.  The Soviet Union, for
instance, would have pursued nuclear technology in its own sloppy way in 
the '50s, no matter what "the public" (either its own or the West) said 
about it. This is just one of the political problems that, as Bill correctly 
notes, must be factored into any realistic proposal for a solution.  It was
my impression that the US did not get into breeder reactors in a big way
for exactly the implications that Bill suggests, but this apparently did
not stop France and Japan (someone correct me if my facts are wrong).

  Putting the burden of proof on developers is also, I think, unrealistic.
Should BNR have to *prove* that there are no ill effects from computerized
telephone switching systems before "we" permit their sale (and let's not
consider only physical effects, how about psychological/sociological ones)?
And how would they do so, anyway, in the face of really thoroughgoing
paranoia?  

  We don't understand anything well enough to *prove* that it will have no 
ill effects, or to prove that our plans for solving (even) the problems we 
know about will survive arbitrary political futures.  I agree with Bill 
that a more informed (and participative, cf. the results of the referendum) 
public is essential, but I don't share his view that it would have avoided
the current mess.

-Darrell.
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck)
Subject: Re: Canada 125
Reply-To: Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Distribution: can
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 22:19:00 GMT

scott@skypod.gts.org (Scott Campbell) writes:

>In article <schuck.720911775@sfu.ca> Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca writes:
>>amdunn@mongrel.UUCP (Andrew M. Dunn) writes:
>>
>>>In article <1992Nov3.175158.20317@sfu.ca> schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck) writes:
>>>Don't bring the Tories into it.  If they hadn't had to strike budgets
>>>with 30 billion a year in debt service (courtesy of the preceeding
>>>Liberal government which ran up the debt in the first place) I'm
>>>_sure_ the budget could have been well-balanced.
>>
>>But they did have such a deficit, and you govern the financial situation
>>you have -- not the one you wish you had.

>Huh? The financial situation they had was the situation of having to
>pay billions of dollars to creditors.  Where was this money going to
>come from?

The debt was 160 billion dollars in 1984.
It is now 425 billion. 

The interest in 1984 was 16-20 billion. [Assuming 10-12.5%]
It is now 30 billion -- and has been more. [Assuming 7%]

It was manageable and fixable in 1984.
It may be too late now.


>>However, the Tories never had the *will* to solve the deficit.
>>
>And we should have let the fiscally responsible Liberals runs things
>more into the ground?  Or maybe the NDP? Hahahahahahahahahahaha

I didn't say the NDP or the Liberals were a good choice -- and if I
did I should have my fingers broken.

I'm sure that none of the 3 major parties has the will to really
tackle the deficit.

I think the Reform Party might have the will, but I don't think they
will be elected.

My guess is that *nobody* will tackle the deficit and 3rd world status
is just around the corner for Canada. Emigrate while you can. 
-- 
============================================================================
"We've got to get bigger guns" -- Dick Durkin                  schuck@sfu.ca
============================================================================
Newsgroups: can.general,mtl.general,mcgill.general
From: BFRS <BFRS@MUSICB.MCGILL.CA>
Subject: Poppies
Organization: McGill University
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 01:10:26 GMT

Just a reminder for everyone to buy a poppy to remember our
fallen comrades.
Newsgroups: can.general
Subject: Re: Why aren't things like plutonium shipments kept secret?
From: emd@ham.almanac.bc.ca
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 12:13:05 PST
Distribution: can
Organization: Robert Smits

mennie@bcrki39.bnr.ca (Bill Mennie 3-4473) writes:

> 
> A good example is the problem of mine tailings from uraniaum mines and
> spent fuel from nuclear reactors.  There still is no acceptable plan for
> dealing with these and accurate, total costs of proposed methods are
> still unknown.  The nuclear industry claims to have technical solutions
> and is frustrated by the politics of "not in my backyard".  These
> politics are just as real as the waste material and any acceptable
> solution must address them as well.  The former Soviet Union and India
> thought they could solve the political problem by pretending nothing was
> going on.  Today, thousands of people are dying of cancer due to lack of
> public scrutiny of such practices.
> 


While I agree with much of what Mr. Mennie said elsewhere in his article 
regarding the general issue of secrecy surrounding the various nuclear 
programs, I take issue with the assertion that there is no acceptable 
plan for dealing with spent fuel from nuclear reactors.

The question isn't whether there is any "acceptable" plan, but acceptable 
to whom, and on what basis the plan is judged acceptable. If the plans 
were assessed strictly on a scientific basis, and evaluated from the 
point of view of the best scientific assessment of the risk only, there 
are a number of ways that spent nuclear fuel can be quite safely stored.

For example, locking nuclear waste in synthetic rock blocks, which are 
then covered with several layers of metals impervious to water erosion 
and then placed deep underground in a stable geologic area certainly 
reduces any risk to the public to an extremely small factor.

The main problem as I see it is that it is virtually impossible to have 
any rational discussion with the general public on what is and is not 
reasonably safe. The general public is, by and large, technically and 
scientifically illiterate, and accept as "fact" even the most ridiculous 
statements made by some of the more extreme "fruitcakes" of the 
environmental movement. The attitude of some in the nuclear industry that 
all critics were "fruitcakes" has certainly not assisted the nuclear 
industry's credibility. 

There must be some way, however, for society to make reasoned decisions 
based on scientific fact. To that end, much less secrecy regarding all 
aspects of nuclear operations is a plus, although I wouldn't necessarily 
extend that to details of when and how each shipment of hazardous goods 
is made being a matter of public knowledge. While it would certainly be 
appropriate for the public to know such shipments are being made, and the 
appropriate regulatory agencies should know, why facilitate possible 
terrorist activity?


emd@ham.almanac.bc.ca
Ladysmith B.C. 604-245-5531
Hams always know WATTS UP!
From: dale@dale.CAM.ORG (Dale Wharton)
Newsgroups: can.general
Subject: The Council of Canadians:  November 20-22, Ottawa
Date: 11 Nov 92 15:17:51 GMT
Organization: private


                                         ./\.     Annual meeting
                                      _|\|  |/|_  Council of Canadians
  A G E N D A   F O R   C H A N G E   \        /  20-22 November 1992
                                       >______<   National Arts Centre
                                           \      Ottawa

  YOU ARE INVITED to four public sessions this year.  One will take
  place after work Friday, November 20, two on Saturday morning, and
  one on Saturday night.  Look for details of these events--to come.

  The Council of Canadians is a national, nonpartisan, public interest
  organization of 22,000 members.  It is devoted to the enhancement
  and preservation of Canadian sovereignty and political independence.
  The COC monitors Canada's domestic and foreign policies, lobbies
  decisionmakers to protect Canadian interests, promotes alternatives
  for an independent Canada in a world community of nations.

  The Council of Canadians  *  (613) 233-2773, fax 233-6776
  1006-251 Laurier Avenue West  *  Ottawa ON  K1P 5J6
Xref: sparky can.general:5349 can.politics:9629 soc.culture.canada:8491
From: rkoo@unixg.ubc.ca (Richard W Koo)
Newsgroups: can.general
Subject: InterNET access outside university sites in Calgary
Date: 11 Nov 1992 09:54:51 GMT
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Distribution: canada
NNTP-Posting-Host: unixg.ubc.ca


Hey folks!  Got a quick question about iNET access in Calgary.  I have a 
friend who can't get access to the iNET system from the University of Calgary,
(mainly because they won't let him get an account unless he takes a Comp Sci.
course first).  Anyhow, I was wondering if there are any private boards in
the Calgary region that serve as gateways to the network.  Any help would be
appreciated.  Thanks.


Richard Koo
University of British Columbia, Vancouver Canada
rkoo@unixg.ubc.ca

Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison)
Subject: Re: Voting Systems (was Re: Proportional representation)
Organization: University of BC, Electrical Engineering
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 05:58:30 GMT

In article <92313.2156392893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> 2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA (andy) writes:
>
>Is this done on a riding basis or a national basis
>

what does that have to do with Arrow's theorem? Have you been reading or
not??
>
>How are these people paid. Do all delegates get the same wages, do they all get
> support staff, offices, constituency offices etc. Your system has the
>potential for dramatically increasing the number of reps we have and the
>related expenses. Also, you ignore that there is more to being an MP than
>voting, there is also lobbying on your constituents' behalf and helping them
>with their problems and bureaucracy. Obviously a riding with 4 MPs has an
>advantage, even if their delegates votes have the same weight as a riding
>with one delegate, they are still better represented and have better service
>and better access to the government and bureaucracy.
>

Fos crissake, the specifics have nothing to do with whether or not this
system falls into the range where Arrow's theorem applies. If you had been
following the discussion, you might have realized that.

If you DO want to discuss details of this hypothetical system, I would
would suggest that the delegate get payed proportionally to how many votes 
they get.

Whether or not there is more to being an MP, is a statement of opinion, and
has no bearing on the theorem.

And "obviously" a riding with 4 MPs has no more advantage over a riding with
1 MP if the delegates have different numebers of votes to cast. A 
delegate-MP with 400 votes has an equal amount of power as 4 MPs with 100
votes each.

>It's a very complicated system whose goals could be better achieved through
>other methods, like the German model.
>

the merit was not the topic of discussion. Anyway, it's about as conceptually
complicated as tying your shoelaces, you mange that, or don't you?

-- 
__________________________________________________________________________
 John Paul Morrison                     |  
 University of British Columbia, Canada |  
 Electrical Engineering                 |   .sig file without a cause
 jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca              VE7JPM |  
________________________________________|_________________________________
Xref: sparky can.general:5309 can.politics:9501 soc.culture.canada:8401