HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: roy@biostat.med.umich.edu (Roy St. Laurent)
Subject: Re: My opinion of the "Great" Lakes...
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 16:33:19 EDT
Organization: University of Michigan Biostatistics, Ann Arbor
Distribution: usa
Reply-To: roy@biostat.med.umich.edu (Roy St. Laurent)
Originator: roy@sol


In article <1992Sep14.170727.21194@parsifal.umkc.edu>, vax1::rtiger@vax1.umkc.edu (Roy Bengal Tiger) writes:
|> 
|> I've seen 'em. They ain't that great.

Go away.  This group is for Great Lakes groupies, not the unappreciative/
unwashed!
From: v384rv4k@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Lynn Harper)
Newsgroups: alt.great-lakes
Subject: Fires in N. Ton.
Date: 10 Sep 92 17:09:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

What's all this about fires in North Tonawanda?  I live
there and haven't even noticed!  Too much studying.  What's
burning?  I though garbage-pickers were more the problem
these days.  Also, Buffalo proper has already had at least
3 more murders than it had in all of last year.  They're
calling it a crime wave.  

Lynn
Newsgroups: alt.great-lakes
From: jwagner@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Judith O Wagner)
Subject: Re: WISCONSIN!!!
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 12:34:12 GMT

In article <QefbOGu00VQCQbNWNW@andrew.cmu.edu> Christopher Ryan Stengel <cs4v+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

<stuff deleted>
>
>Or how about this one:
>
>"My heart is in Madison.
>M-A-D-I-S-O-N
>Where the boys are the squarest.
>The girls are the fairest,
>Of any old town I've been in.
>
>My heart is in Madison.
>M-A-D-I-S-O-N
>In all kinds of weather,
>We'll all stick together,
>in M-A-D-I-S-O-N."
>
>My head and heart are full of them!
>
>Chris
>Badger fan from Hell.
>

Chris--I, too, am a Badger fan--having spent 15 years in Madison and
Baraboo (where the Circus parade originates and all those marvelous
wagons live).  And I will grant you that "If you wanna be a Badger..."
is a Wisconsin song.  However, "My heart is in Madison" is a direct
steal from "We're strong for Toledo" which was written many moons ago
be an acquaintance of my father--who is now 91.  Sorry, but, although
I love Wisconsin more, I was born and raised in Toledo!

Judy Wagner


Newsgroups: alt.great-lakes
From: mprisco@lynx.cat.syr.edu ()
Subject: Lake Ontario
Organization: Syracuse University
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 16:18:08 EDT

Just a plug for the little lake!  And don't forget, all of
the other lakes drain into Ontario, so keep it clean!

I live in a small city right on the lake (abotu 60 miles
east of Rochester) and it is lovely (the lake, not the
city :)  I was in the Green Mountains of Vermont this
weekend and while they were nice....I miss the water!
Plus, we have maple syrup and great cheddar cheese here
in upstate NY!  And we have lots and lots of snow (yuk)...
Well, the leaves will be turning soon, nice time for a
trip to the Thousand Islands!

Margot

--
=====================================================================
=          H A V E   A   D A Y             :|                       =
=====================================================================
Newsgroups: alt.great-lakes
From: beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver)
Subject: Re: Impact of the absent father
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 14:38:23 GMT

In article <1992Sep7.025353.995@cco.caltech.edu> peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri) writes:
>>Let's see, *ALL* circumstances-
>>of-conception are essentially the same, right? The guy who gets defrauded,
>>or who gets his semen stolen, has "taken on that responsibility" just as
>>much as the divorced man withholding child-support as a way of pissing off
>>his ex-wife, right?

>How, exactly, does a man get his semen stolen?  Is there a market for
>such stolen goods?  What is the penalty for transport of stolen semen
>across state lines?

I didn't see a smiley-face here.  I don't know of any market for
such goods, but I wouldn't be surprised if someone who robbed a
sperm bank and drove to another state couldn be accused of a federal
crime.  But whether it came from a bank or directly from a man,
what does the criminality have to do with it?  It is the unpermitted
use of semen that is objectionable (and +distinguishable+ from +permitted+ 
use), whether it occurs often or never and whether it is criminal or not.

Is there a market for stolen water?  If you have a water meter and
alter it, are you morally and/or legally culpable?  Is water-theft
ignorable because transporting stolen water across state borders would
be a "ridiculous" crime?  Talk to a farmer or to someone in a city
that doesn't have its own water source.  (eg., Pasadena?)


>Seriously, guys, there *are* practically perfect ways of controlling
>where your semen ends up.  Use a condom.  Check it before you ejaculate.
>Granted that isn't 100.00000% perfect, but it's darn close!

"Check it before you ejaculate."  What eminently reasonable advice.  :-|

As for "100.00000%," unless Cal Tech has pioneered a new version
of the meaning of significant decimal places, your usage suggests that 
"darn close" means within an error of at most  +/- 0.0001%.
Namely, condoms surely work at least 99.9999% of the time.  
Even were this the case, if 100,000,000 men used a condom just ONCE,
100 failures would occur; a hundred times a year would be 10,000 failures
that you seem to be willing to disregard.

Unless your version of "darn close" diverges strongly, I hope
that Cal Tech also offers sex ed courses, or that you invest in
health insurance for abortion or obstetrics.

Don
-- 
beaver@cs.psu.edu                       Opinions from the PC-challenged
Xref: sparky alt.dads-rights:2214 alt.child-support:3082 soc.men:16084 soc.women:16270 misc.kids:22717
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,alt.child-support,soc.men,soc.women,misc.kids
Subject: Re:  Impact of the absent father
From: liam@durie.amigans.gen.nz (Liam Greenwood)
Date: 8 Sep 92 21:10:07 GMT+12
Distribution: world
Organization: It's Home, really...

In article <1992Sep7.025353.995@cco.caltech.edu> peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri) writes:
>Seriously, guys, there *are* practically perfect ways of controlling
>where your semen ends up.  Use a condom.  Check it before you ejaculate.
>Granted that isn't 100.00000% perfect, but it's darn close!
    So who do you reckon pays in the 0.001+ instances where it DOESN'T work.
--
 Liam Greenwood ------ liam@durie.amigans.gen.nz ------ Wanganui, N.Z.
                 Don't tell my Mother I'm a programmer,
               she thinks I'm a piano player in a brothel

Xref: sparky alt.dads-rights:2271 soc.men:16419 alt.child-support:3186
From: yasu@ll.mit.edu (Alan Yasutovich)
Subject: Re: Remote (Taxpayer) Wallets
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 12:21:15 GMT

In article <1992Sep6.002053.11254@rotag.mi.org> kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>
>Supporting EXISTING children I have no problem with, generally, as a matter
>of policy. But encouraging these "accidents" to happen over and over and over
>and over and over again strikes me as particularly myopic, and particularly
>detrimental to our GNP and a disservice to the children who are raised 
>without two willing, natural, custodial parents -- these are the same children
>the laws are (misguidedly) intended to _help_, remember?
>
>After how many "accidents" do we, as a society, scream "ENOUGH!!!"? When do we 
>start applying prevention, instead of continual, failed band-aid "cures"? I
>cast my vote for eliminating the Illegitimacy Incentive.
>
>								- Kevin


	1) I find it hard to believe that *most* pregnancies in question
	are "accidents"

	2)  "Existing" children all came from the pregnancies that you
	contest.


-- 
	Alan Yasutovich
	"inquiring  (and nosey) minds WANT TO KNOW!!!"
	I can remember when "safe sex" meant having a padded headboard!!
	Tick Tock.....Tick Tock......Tick Tock .....Tick Tock......
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,alt.child-support,soc.men,soc.women,misc.kids
From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
Subject: Re: Remote (Taxpayer) Wallets
Organization: Who, me???
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 00:20:53 GMT

In article <1992Sep03.224805.10739@uumeme.chi.il.us> drac@uumeme.chi.il.us (Bruce Maynard) writes:
>In article <1992Aug28.205335.11657@u.washington.edu> hamton@byron.u.washington.edu (MrEuStress) writes:
>>Bronis Vidugiris writes
>>>It's logical that you don't want the taxpayer to be a 
>>> remote wallet either, IMO.
>>
>>   Only if the larger population of taxpayers
>>   choose to pay the Child Support!
>>
>>   The taxpayers have no right to financially
>>   rape some one who does not wish to be a dad.
>>
>
>If these persons don't want to be dads, they should have either stayed out of
>"field work" or taken other precautions. If you can't do the time,
>then don't do the "crime", Willoughby...
>
>If, on the other hand, y'all "don't like the feel of condoms", or are too rushed,
>then ye've a real problem. You want yer cookies? Then take responsibility
>(1/2 the total responsibility... takes two to tango!) for yer actions!

What if my exercise of free will was impaired by being deliberately misled?
What if she said she was on the pill, and that SHE didn't "like the feel of
condoms", and it turned out she just wanted someone to subsidize her solo
parenthood? Once the rabbit dies, it's "Bye bye, hon. Just make the checks out
to 'supermom', okay?". Would you reward such fraud and duplicity? Would you 
encourage the next woman to pull the same stunt?

Supporting EXISTING children I have no problem with, generally, as a matter
of policy. But encouraging these "accidents" to happen over and over and over
and over and over again strikes me as particularly myopic, and particularly
detrimental to our GNP and a disservice to the children who are raised 
without two willing, natural, custodial parents -- these are the same children
the laws are (misguidedly) intended to _help_, remember?

After how many "accidents" do we, as a society, scream "ENOUGH!!!"? When do we 
start applying prevention, instead of continual, failed band-aid "cures"? I
cast my vote for eliminating the Illegitimacy Incentive.

								- Kevin
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,soc.men,alt-child-support,soc.women,misc.kids,misc.legal
From: icsip193@Msu.oscs.montana.edu
Subject: Re: Moderated?
Reply-To: icsip193@Msu.oscs.montana.edu
Organization: Montana State University
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 02:32:40 GMT

Well, here's a little story 'bout a man named Joe, way up north from the Gulf
of Mexico, one fine day he was drinkin' up his booze, when up from the boat
came 'a bubblin crude!  Oil, that is.  Black Gold.  Texas Tea.  Prince Williams 
plug!
Newsgroups: soc.women.alt.child-support,alt.dads-rights,soc.men
From: terwill@arecibo.aero.org (Bill who?)
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights
Subject: Clintons Deadbeat Commercial
Date: 10 Sep 1992 13:25 -0800
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation
Distribution: world
Reply-To: terwill@arecibo.aero.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: arecibo.aero.org
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

Yesterday I again heard the Clinton Deadbeat commercial (in California):

"In Arkansas, if you fall behind a $1,000. in your child support payments we
(he and Hillary?) report you to every credit agency in the state (is there
more than 1?) We want to do for America what we have done for Arkansas." 

Now, here in the Golden State (really named by lawyers) I would bet that there
are lots of fathers paying more than a $1,000. a month. What if you are
a week late? How do you recover financially? Scary.

Bill

Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,alt.child-support,soc.women.soc.men,misc.kids,misc.legal,soc.couples,soc.singles,alt.sex.stories,rec.arts.tv.soaps
From: beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver)
Subject: Re: Impact of the absent father
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 02:37:10 GMT

In article <1992Sep4.155834.18745@mdd.comm.mot.com> nelson@mdd.comm.mot.com (Mike Nelson) writes:

>I'd rather see more cases of joint custody. The child would live
>primarily with the mother (or 50-50). The father is then not
>so removed from the situation. He doesn't then support the
>child, he is being one of the childs parents. 

Why with the mother?  And what if the parents are geographically separated?

Don
-- 
beaver@cs.psu.edu                       Opinions from the PC-challenged
From: erik@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Erik Lode)
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 16:16:31 GMT
Subject: Re: Benefit Fundraiser for Missing, Abused, & Exploited Children
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights

lindae@netcom.com () writes:

> Bop 'til you drop at the "Halloween Hop"
> Friday, October 30th
> Dinner, 7:30 p.m.
> 50's Music & Dancing
> 8:15 p.m.
> No-host cocktails, doors open at 6:00 p.m.


				Where?

Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,alt.child-support,soc.men,misc.legal
From: dpollard@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Dennis B Pollard)
Subject: Re: How a Judge is Born in America
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 23:36:19 GMT



In article <1992Sep4.170259.1418@nsisrv.gsfc.nasa.gov> dsc@gemini.tmc.edu (Doug
 S. Caprette Bldg. 28 W191 x3892) writes:
>In article <1992Sep1.053218.4660@cbnewsk.cb.att.com> noraa@cbnewsk.cb.att.com
(aaron.l.hoffmeyer) writes:

[stuff deleted]

>>### Begin
>>
>>How a Judge is Born in America
>>
>>To become a judge in any state in the United States, a person first
>>must become an attorney.  After practicing law for a few years, an
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>attorney can then decide whether he or she would like to become a judge.
>>There are two primary ways to obtain that goal.
>>
>
>Have you verified this?  A survey I saw published about 15 years ago (popular
>press, not from a reliable source) indicated that only about 25% of juvenile
>court judges in the US were attorneys, only half had 4 year college degrees.
>
>I would be glad to learn that the situation had changed.
>

There was a time, perhaps not fifteen years ago, when you did not have to 
become a lawyer in order to become a judge.  In fact, a 60 Minutes feature 
focused on one such woman judge a couple of years ago.
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,alt.child-support,soc.men,misc.legal
From: smfoster@well.sf.ca.us (Sharon M. Foster)
Subject: Re: How a Judge is Born in America
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 01:09:03 GMT

In article <1992Sep4.233619.15211@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> dpollard@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Dennis B Pollard) writes:
>
>
>In article <1992Sep4.170259.1418@nsisrv.gsfc.nasa.gov> dsc@gemini.tmc.edu (Doug
> S. Caprette Bldg. 28 W191 x3892) writes:
>>In article <1992Sep1.053218.4660@cbnewsk.cb.att.com> noraa@cbnewsk.cb.att.com
>(aaron.l.hoffmeyer) writes:
>
>[stuff deleted]
>
>>>### Begin
>>>
>>>How a Judge is Born in America
>>>
>>>To become a judge in any state in the United States, a person first
>>>must become an attorney.  After practicing law for a few years, an
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>attorney can then decide whether he or she would like to become a judge.
>>>There are two primary ways to obtain that goal.
>>>
>>
>>Have you verified this?  A survey I saw published about 15 years ago (popular
>>press, not from a reliable source) indicated that only about 25% of juvenile
>>court judges in the US were attorneys, only half had 4 year college degrees.
>>
>>I would be glad to learn that the situation had changed.
>>
>
>There was a time, perhaps not fifteen years ago, when you did not have to 
>become a lawyer in order to become a judge.  In fact, a 60 Minutes feature 
>focused on one such woman judge a couple of years ago.


In Connecticut, state judges are appointed, but probate judges are
still elected, and there is no requirement to be a practicing lawyer
or even to have a law degree.  At least one probate judges that I know
of has a degree as a paralegal from the same community college I went
to last year.

Sharon "Still-Smiling 1L" Foster
Xref: sparky alt.dads-rights:2197 soc.men:15964 soc.women:16171 misc.kids:22591
From: dmcmilla@djm.cs.gmr.com (Don McMillan CS 50)
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights
Subject: Joint Legal/Physical and deductions
Date: 10 Sep 92 15:08:45 GMT
Reply-To: dmcmilla@djm.cs.gmr.com (Don McMillan CS 50)

Can someone tell me (e-mail) which of the two custody types determines the
'right' to take the dependent deductions on the federal tax return?
Also, what if that custody is given jointly?


Thanks!

-don

 \_\_\_\_      \_\_\_\_\_   \_      \_           Don McMillan       __  .   .  
 \_      \_         \_       \_\_  \_\_          GM Research Labs  /  ` |\ /|  
  \_       \_        \_       \_ \_\_ \_         (313) 986-1436    | ,_ | | |  
   \_       \_        \_       \_  \_  \_                          \__/ |   |  
    \_       \_        \_       \_      \_                                     
     \_      \_   \_   \_        \_      \_      CSNet: mcmillan@gmr.com
      \_\_\_\_      \_\_          \_      \_     I-net: dmcmilla@djm.cs.gmr.com
Xref: sparky alt.dads-rights:2216 alt.child-support:3088 soc.men:16092 soc.women:16277 misc.kids:22727
From: gazit@duke.cs.duke.edu (Hillel Gazit)
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,alt.child-support,soc.men,soc.women,misc.kids
Subject: Re:  Impact of the absent father
Date: 8 Sep 92 15:10:55 GMT
Reply-To: gazit@cs.duke.edu (Hillel)
Followup-To: soc.men
Organization: Nefolet shel nemushot (Fallout of Wimps)

>In article <1992Sep7.025353.995@cco.caltech.edu> peri@cco.caltech.edu 
(Michal Leah Peri) writes:
>>Seriously, guys, there *are* practically perfect ways of controlling
>>where your semen ends up.  Use a condom.  Check it before you ejaculate.
>>Granted that isn't 100.00000% perfect, but it's darn close!

Consumers Report claimed that condoms are 85% effective.  In other words,
over one year of using condoms, there is 15% probability for an unwanted
pregnancy.  In 7 years, the expectation is more than 1...

Michal, and quite a few feminists, think that it is perfectly 
fine to destroy a man's life when something like this happens.

I wonder if they have similar attitude when women have a failure in
their 99% safe birth control methods..
Xref: sparky alt.dads-rights:2272 soc.men:16420 alt.child-support:3187
From: woody@wolves.uucp (Woody Muller)
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,alt.child-support,soc.men,soc.women,misc.kids
Subject: Re: Remote (Taxpayer) Wallets
Date: 5 Sep 92 22:51:35 GMT
Organization: Wolves Den UNIX, Durham NC
X-Md4-Signature: c35ad63fcace8cb86685dd32f7bddcaf

In <1992Sep3.224314.6484@u.washington.edu> hamton@byron.u.washington.edu (MrEuStress) writes:

>  "My children" (as you are wont to call them) 
>  live in a home that makes about $70,000 per year 
>  -- I make about $4,000 per year.

And you're so monumentally stupid that you're running from the court
rather than bringing this to their attantion.  Then you whine because
they make decisions without facts.  But you dug your own hole, pal.

-- 
woody@wolves.durham.nc.us
"Nothing in human affairs is worth any great anxiety."  -Plato
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,alt.child-support,soc.men,soc.women,misc.kids
From: peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri)
Subject: Re: Impact of the absent father
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 02:53:53 GMT

>Let's see, *ALL* circumstances-
>of-conception are essentially the same, right? The guy who gets defrauded,
>or who gets his semen stolen, has "taken on that responsibility" just as
>much as the divorced man withholding child-support as a way of pissing off
>his ex-wife, right?

How, exactly, does a man get his semen stolen?  Is there a market for
such stolen goods?  What is the penalty for transport of stolen semen
across state lines?

Seriously, guys, there *are* practically perfect ways of controlling
where your semen ends up.  Use a condom.  Check it before you ejaculate.
Granted that isn't 100.00000% perfect, but it's darn close!

						--  Michal
From: brnstnd@nyu.edu (D. J. Bernstein)
Newsgroups: alt.suit.att-bsdi
Subject: Re: Educational Unix licenses, derived works, and employability
Date: 6 Sep 92 23:56:11 GMT
Organization: IR

In article <Btv08G.FAx@news.cso.uiuc.edu> acheng@ncsa.uiuc.edu (Albert Cheng) writes:
> Since Berkeley is a state supported university and much of the BSD
> work is supported by Federal grants (NSF, ...), so the BSD work is
> jointly owned by California state and Federal government.

No. I happen to have been under contract to Berkeley and to the NSF, so
I can speak with some authority.

Berkeley does require that employees who develop patentable inventions
give the university the opportunity to patent those inventions. It does
not claim other intellectual property rights.

NSF explicitly disclaims all intellectual property rights in work
supported by its grants. It requires that grant recipients make their
work available to the public ``without restriction'' except as may be
required for national security.

Sample application: If Ron Rivest was under contract to the National
Science Foundation when he helped develop RSA, then he was undoubtedly
required to make his work available to the public ``without
restriction,'' which he did not do---he patented it. Furthermore, the
government doesn't get any rights to his work. Yet Rivest's company,
RSADSI, has successfully avoided government prosecution by claiming that
the government gets to use RSA for free. And now many people think that
NSF support implies government ownership. [sigh]

---Dan
Newsgroups: alt.suit.att-bsdi
From: karn@qualcom.qualcomm.com (Phil Karn)
Subject: Re: An old quote from Dennis Ritchie
Keywords: dmr's Turing Lecture
Reply-To: karn@chicago.qualcomm.com
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 06:00:45 GMT

In article <1992Sep6.164004.15023@alijku05.edvz.uni-linz.ac.at>, ddean@sapphire.risc.uni-linz.ac.at (Drew Dean) quotes Dennis Ritchie:
|> they are locked into the existing world....The working examples of  
|> important new systems seem to have come either from entrepreneurial  
|> efforts (Visicalc is a good example) or from large companies, like Bell  
|> Labs and most especially Xerox, that were much involved with computers and  
|> could afford research into them, but did not regard them as their primary  
|> business.

This is ABSOLUTELY true. Having worked for Bell Labs between 1978 and
1984 (when I went to Bellcore in the breakup) I can say that their
UNIX efforts became much less interesting and innovative, albeit much
bigger, the instant they began seeing computer business dollar signs
at the end of the antitrust tunnel. That's when they tried to tie
UNIX, whose main claim to fame was portability, to their misbegotten
3B line, a mistake from which they have yet to learn.  And they've
made many others, such as turning their already legendary NIH up to
full blast, completely ignoring all the Berkeley innovations.

Of course, NIH is common to many other commercial ventures. It's
really the logical counterpart to secrecy. And I think it may account
for much of the lack of innovation that Ritchie ascribes wholly to
secrecy.  In other words, innovation suffers because communication is
obstructed in *both* directions, rather than merely outward.

When you build a project for reasons other than to make money from
selling it, only your own ego keeps you from incorporating all the
best ideas, regardless of source.  And if your goal is to solve a
problem that you have (i.e., you're the end user), you have a strong
incentive to overcome that ego.

But when you build something specifically for sale, you have to make
sure you own (or have firm rights to) *everything* in it. And given
the utterly confused state of patent and copyright law regarding
software, the legal paranoia just helps to fuel the natural human NIH
tendencies, especially in large organizations who think they have all
the answers in-house.  ("If it came from the outside, it's probably a
worse idea. And even if it's better, it's probably patented. So we
can't use it.")

It is not a coincidence that UNIX was developed when AT&T was solely
an end-user of computers. And their bottom line would be a LOT better
now if they had simply placed UNIX in the public domain and bought
back UNIX systems to meet their own in-house needs for running a long
distance telephone network. That seems to be only job they've ever
done well.

Phil


Newsgroups: alt.suit.att-bsdi