HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: root@cltr.uq.oz.au (Hulk Hogan)
Newsgroups: aus.news
Subject: Re: Which NewsGroups not being imported into Australia?
Date: 30 Sep 92 00:30:43 GMT
Distribution: aus
Organization: Centre for Language Teaching and Research, Uni of Queensland, AUSTRALIA.

kre@cs.mu.oz.au (Robert Elz) writes:
>In <1992Sep21.054856.29370@cltr.uq.OZ.AU>
>root@cltr.uq.oz.au (Hulk Hogan) writes:
>| Errr.  I recall about 2 years ago the announcement in aus.general or
>| somewhere that alt.sex.pictures and alt.drugs were to be blocked.
>I think you remember incorrectly, it was alt.sex and everything under it.
>(And alt.drugs).

>Sometime after that, some of the groups (maybe all, I don't know)
>started coming via an alternate path.   Maybe that has stopped,
>again I don't know (if someone does know, and wants to send me
>e-mail about it I can let people know without making it 100% obvious
>where the alternate link was).

Hmm.. I was sure it was just alt.sex.pictures and alt.drugs that were
listed as being "banned", and anyone using aarnet links to transport 
those two around was in trouble, and no using alternate NNTPSERVERs and
so on...  But that the rest of alt and alt.sex  was Ok and imported as
normal... 

I did check some saved articles from other newsgroups, and they were, as
kre says, coming in via an alternate path.  I just assumed that only a.s.p
and alt.drugs were not being imported, but the other alt.sex groups were.

>As to who requested the block - that was the US end of the internet
>link (the people who pay for (now much of, then all of) the US side
>of the circuit).

Hmm.  I have a recollection of at that time, the Fed Govt announced a
Senate Inquiry into the 0055 services, and then AARNet announced that
pending the outcome of that, due to the possibility that the transmission
of a.s.p and alt.drugs across telecom links could be illegal and so on,
they were ordering it be blocked.  Or that's what was said.

Guesstimating  1MB/day of traffic in the blocked groups, and given that the
satellite link has gone from, what 64?k then to 512k now [is that kbits or
kbytes? I assume kbits],  then 1MB could take, what, 15 secs to transfer.  
Bandwidth can't really be an issue now, can it?  Removing the block would
mean it's only imported once..

Is AARNet willing to stand up for free speech and risk being branded as a
"computer porno network funded by tax payer dollars, accessed by bludging
ungrateful long-haired uni students some as young as 25" by Hinch-esque
media figures?   Doesn't seem so.. :-/

/\ndy
--
Andrew M. Jones,  Systems Programmer, 	Email: {root,andy}@lingua.cltr.uq.oz.au
Centre for Lang. Teaching & Research, 	UUCP: uunet!lingua.cltr.uq.oz.au!andy
University of Queensland,  St. Lucia, 	Phone: +61  7 365 6915 (Use 07 in Oz)
Brisbane,  Qld. AUSTRALIA  4072    	Fax: +61 7 365 7077    IRC: HulkHogan

"No matter what hits the fan, it's never distributed evenly....."
From: nick@kralizec.zeta.org.au (Nick Andrew)
Newsgroups: aus.followup
Subject: Re: Public Access Sites
Date: 5 Oct 92 22:13:42 GMT
Distribution: aus
Organization: Kralizec Dialup Unix Sydney: +61-2-837-1183 V.32

gja@mullian.ee.mu.oz.au (Grenville Armitage) writes:

>>       * 450+ USENET conferences
>eh?

It was written for people to whom the term 'newsgroups' means slightly less
than 'conferences'.

Nick.
-- 
Kralizec Dialup Unix (Public Access)    Data: +61-2-837-1183, 14400 24hrs 8N1
Zeta Microcomputer Software             Data: +61-2-837-1868, 2400 24hrs 8N1
P.O. Box 177, Riverstone NSW 2765       Plan: To beat Gnuchess 4.1 !
Newsgroups: aus.followup
From: djk@bby.com.au (David James Keegel)
Subject: Female/male income ratio
Summary: How is the 0.88 for Australia calculated?
Organization: Burdett, Buckeridge & Young, Melbourne, Australia
Distribution: aus
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 08:26:39 GMT

axolotl@socs.uts.edu.au (Iain Sinclair) writes:
] Last week, it was reported that Australian women are the second highest
] paid in the world (after Iceland), with 88c out of the (male) $1.

I've seen referencess to this as well.  Does anyone know exactly how
this was calculated?  For instance, here are a few different ratios
which could be computed depending on what you want to show (not
precisely defined, but you get the idea):

   total income earned by all females	total income earned by all males
1) ---------------------------------- :	----------------------------------
	  number of females			number of males

    income earned by females 18-60	 income earned by males 18-65
1)  --------------------------------  :	 ----------------------------
     number of females aged 18-60	  number of males aged 18-65

   income earned by working females	income earned by working males
3) --------------------------------   :	--------------------------------
	number of working females	   number of working males

   income earned by working females	income earned by working males
4) --------------------------------   :	--------------------------------
	hours worked by females		   hours worked by males

5) average income earned by a female  :	average income earned by a male
       after N years in work	  	      after N years in work

6) average income earned by a female  :	average income earned by a male
       for some particular job	  	 for the same job at same level

I'm sure there are more, and I haven't even touched on the question of
whether "house-work" and child-rearing should be entered into the equation.

My (totally uneducated) guess would be that ratio (1) would be about 0.5
and the ratio (6) would be about 0.98 (depending on which job you choose,
of course).  I very much hope that the second highest figure in the world
for the last ratio is only 0.88, but I think the last ratio is the one
which is most useful.

My assumptions are that there are more men in the work-force, that there
are more women over retirement age (they smoked less:-), that women are
more likely to be in part-time work, that working men spend a larger
proportion of their lives working (less materity leave, for instance),
and that women are generally over-represented in lower paying jobs while
men are over-represented in higher paying jobs (unfortunately). 

Does anyone know the values of these ratios in Australia (in the world)?
-- 
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| David Keegel   <djk@bby.com.au>   Ph: +61 3 614-8922   Fax: +61 3 614-8742 |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: aus.followup
From: pete@cssc-syd.tansu.com.au (Peter Alexander Merel)
Subject: Re: Chocolate
Organization: AOTC - CSSC
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 00:42:07 GMT

john@physiol.su.OZ.AU (John Mackin) writes:
> daniel@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au (Daniel Bowen) writes:

>> Actually, Darrell Lea is an Australian company that makes its own
>> chocolates. According to the AusBuy guide thing, it's the only
>> Australian owned company making chocolates.

>Unfortunately, their chocolates are _awful_.  As is their licorice,
>and nearly everything they make.

>The only product of theirs I like is the Bulgarian Rock.

Their "Rocky Road" has a nice texture ... but too much of it will make
you wish you were dead. 

For my money there is only one Australian made chocolate worth eating. 
There's a little shop in Paddo called "Sweet William's". Your mission, 
should you choose to accept it, is to buy from them something called a 
"rich chocolate truffle". It is a deep brown ovoid nodule with sprinkles 
on one side. Eat one. Just one. Terrible things have happened to people 
who ate two.

-- 
Internet: pete@cssc-syd.tansu.com.au   UUCP: {uunet,mcvax}!munnari!cssc-syd!pete
Snail: 1/18-20 Orion Road, Lane Cove NSW 2066 Australia    Phone: +61 2 911 3130
"Nothing is pulling it. Nothing is pushing it. It must be devil's work!"
Newsgroups: aus.followup
From: johnm@metro (John McKirdy)
Subject: Re: Why you shouldn't buy Nestle
Organization: Sydney University Computing Service, Sydney, NSW, Australia
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 10:10:07 GMT

From article <keithl.717564886@mukluk.cc.monash.edu.au>, by keithl@mukluk.cc.monash.edu.au (Keith Lewis):
> 	The WHO code, as it is known, adopted by the 34th world health
> assembly in May 1981, includes the 10 provisions summarized as follows:
> 
> 1) No advertising of these products to the public.
> 2) No free samples to mothers.
> 3) No promotion of products in heath care facilities.
> 4) No company mothercraft nurses to advise mothers.
> 5) No gifts or personal samples to health workers.
> 6) No words or pictures idealising artificial feeding ... on the labels of the product.
> 7) Information to health workers to be scientific and factual.
> 8) All information on ... should explain the benefits of breast feeding ...
> 9) Unsuitable products ... should not be promoted for babies.
> 10) All products should be of a high quality ... 

None of which says to boycott companies which violate this code.
Granted that Nestle's conduct is deplorable, should the market place be used
to exert political pressure?  Should we boycott companies trading with
South Africa, Fiji, or Israel, or companies that don't employ 50% women, or
peddle cigarettes, or have owners with communist sympathies (does anyone these days?)? 

I see no good coming from McCarthyist blacklists because the innocent suffer. 
You and I can see when it is warranted ;-),
but if we do it how can we convince the local branch of the Festival of Light
not to boycott the neighbourhood chemist because it sells condoms?  It's much easier
to say that boycotts are always wrong unless properly sanctioned.

I have to make a slight confession, though; I can't bring myself to buy
any novel written by L. Ron Hubbard.

--john mckirdy---Elec Eng, Uni Sydney---johnm@ee.su.oz.au--
Newsgroups: aus.followup
From: kerry@citr.uq.oz.au (Kerry Raymond)
Subject: Re: Female/male income ratio
Organization: Prentice Centre, University of Queensland
Distribution: aus
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 03:59:14 GMT

djk@bby.com.au (David James Keegel) writes:

I suspect it's just based on the average hourly wage (formula 4) --
probably done on "ordinary-time" hours (as opposed to including penalty
rates for overtime).

>   income earned by working females	        income earned by working males
>4) --------------------------------   :	--------------------------------
>   hours worked by females		        hours worked by males

That method eliminates factors like part-time versus full-time versus
over-time and the extent to which women participate at all in the workforce
(both of which would surely have lowered the ratio well below 88% if they
were included in any way).

The conclusion you can draw about Australia having the 2nd best score
is that anti-discrimination legislation, social attitudes, tax law etc
in Australia have made a difference to *average working women*. What you
cannot tell (from that statistic) are things like:

* are women more likely to be unemployed because they can't get a job or
  because the only jobs they could get are very badly paid or because of
  lack of child care etc.

* do women have the same access to overtime or not due to employer attitudes,
  childcare, society's attitude, ...

* are there barriers limiting women from reaching the highest ranks

Of course you can prove anything with the right statistics. E.g if you
included child allowance payments in women's income or used taxable income
(which include unearned income and work-related deductions and other
complicating factors), you could get all kinds of different results.
From: sjg@melb.bull.oz.au (Simon J Gerraty)
Newsgroups: aus.followup
Subject: Re: Female/male income ratio
Date: 30 Sep 92 01:47:19 GMT
Distribution: aus
Organization: Bull HN Information Systems Australia

In <1992Sep28.082639.24453@bby.com.au> djk@bby.com.au (David James Keegel) writes:
>6) average income earned by a female  :	average income earned by a male
>       for some particular job	  	 for the same job at same level

>... I think the last ratio is the one
>which is most useful.

I agree.

>My assumptions are ...
...
>and that women are generally over-represented in lower paying jobs while
>men are over-represented in higher paying jobs (unfortunately). 

There is no short term solution to this despite what any
politician or lobby group claims.  The long term solution is for
more girls to select maths, science and engineering.  Not that
these carreers pay well, that's another problem BTW, but maths
and science are pre-requisites for most courses that do lead to
well paid careers.

In any case maths and sciences provide valuable skills for any
career.  Especially primary school teachers.  It is a very sad
fact that many children are subconsciously "turned off" these
subjects at an early age because their teachers do not feel
comfortable with the subject.  Often the teacher is not even
aware of the effect he/she is having on the kids, society is
loser. I've known enough primary school teachers to know this is
so :-(

-- 
Simon J. Gerraty        <sjg@zen.void.oz.au>            (home)

#include <disclaimer>   /* imagine something *very* witty here */
Newsgroups: aus.followup
From: kerry@citr.uq.oz.au (Kerry Raymond)
Subject: Re: Why you shouldn't buy Nestle (Is this an urban legend?)
Organization: Prentice Centre, University of Queensland
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 04:11:44 GMT

The infant-formula-in-developing countries was a big issue in the 1970s
and perhaps earlier (for many of the reasons given at length in all of
those articles). Nestles was definitely regarded as one of the major
culprits (rightly or wrongly, I don't know) and was boycotted back at
that time.

From memory, the World Health Organization (or similar) developed a
code of practice for promoting infant formula in those countries
to which Nestles and a number of other companies agreed to abide by.

Is this Nestles story really happening in the 1990s or are we dealing
with an urban legend on the rebound?

Newsgroups: aus.followup
From: axolotl@socs.uts.edu.au (Iain Sinclair)
Subject: Re: Female/male income ratio
Reply-To: axolotl@socs.uts.edu.au
Organization: University of Technology, Sydney
Distribution: aus
Date: 28 Sep 92 10:14:47 GMT

djk@bby.com.au (David James Keegel) writes:
 >I've seen referencess to this as well.  Does anyone know exactly how
 >this was calculated?

I can't remember what the article said.  The important thing, at least
as far as relative ranking goes, is that the same method was used to
calculate the F/M ratio in every country.


 >5) average income earned by a female  :	average income earned by a male
 >       after N years in work	  	      after N years in work
 >
 >6) average income earned by a female  :	average income earned by a male
 >       for some particular job	  	 for the same job at same level

These two would be the hardest to gather data for.  So they probably aren't
the ratio used in the study.  I wonder if our world ranking would change
if different methods were used.


--
 Iain Sinclair    axolotl@socs.uts.edu.au
Newsgroups: aus.followup
From: john@physiol.su.OZ.AU (John Mackin)
Subject: Chocolate (was Re: Why you shouldn't buy Nestle)
Organization: Department of Physiology, University of Sydney, Australia
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 13:49:25 GMT

In article <1992Sep28.020006.12277@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au>,
	 daniel@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au (Daniel Bowen) writes:

> Actually, Darrell Lea is an Australian company that makes its own
> chocolates. According to the AusBuy guide thing, it's the only
> Australian owned company making chocolates.

Unfortunately, their chocolates are _awful_.  As is their licorice,
and nearly everything they make.

The only product of theirs I like is the Bulgarian Rock.

-- 
John Mackin <john@civil.su.oz.au>
Lindt Plain: Accept no substitutes.
Xref: sparky aus.aarnet:944 aus.netstatus:195
From: dclunie@sirius.ucs.adelaide.edu.au (David Clunie)
Newsgroups: aus.aarnet,aus.netstatus
Subject: Re: archie.au and network saturation - overseas users?
Date: 4 Oct 92 14:00:17 GMT
Organization: Her Master's Voice
NNTP-Posting-Host: sirius.itd.adelaide.edu.au


> Why don't the archie admins place a ban on non australian connections
> in (using something like tcpd). Unless this is a problem with AARNet,
> it might help in at least a little way (if only to lower the load
> on archie? :) ).

And why don't the US sites place a bad on non-US connections, and
then the French ban non-French and then the Finns ban non-Finnish ...

Get serious ! After all we are talking "network" here - we are
supposed to be connected. Are we supposed to gain all the benefits
of accessing the rest of the world and provide nothing in return ?

If my taxes are helping someone in France for example find a file
or a program then that sounds fair enough to me ...

Of course if they could be educated to use a lower cost or faster
link that is closer to them then that's fine too, but to limit
access to resources would seem to me to be quite contrary to the
spirit of inter-networking, regardless of how remote, isolated and
parochial we may think we are in Australia !

david
-- 
David Clunie (dclunie@itd.adelaide.edu.au)
Newsgroups: aus.aarnet
From: jason@coombs.anu.edu.au (jason..)
Subject: melb -> sydney (traceroute result / query)
Summary: Why do i get this from a traceroute from melb to sydney ?
Keywords: routing,traceroute
Organization: Computer Services Centre, Australian National University
Date: 30 Sep 92 16:43:02 GMT

(149.171.192.3 is csdvax.csd.unsw.edu.au)

traceroute to 149.171.192.3 (149.171.192.3), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
 1  144.205.5.51 (144.205.5.51)  4 ms  3 ms  3 ms
 2   (139.130.164.1)  28 ms  28 ms  28 ms
 3  national.gw.au (139.130.4.1)  29 ms  29 ms  29 ms
 4  usa.gw.au (139.130.4.5)  30 ms  31 ms  52 ms
 5  national.gw.au (139.130.4.1)  30 ms  30 ms  31 ms
 6  usa.gw.au (139.130.4.5)  40 ms  34 ms  31 ms
 7  national.gw.au (139.130.4.1)  33 ms  35 ms  31 ms
 8  usa.gw.au (139.130.4.5)  31 ms  31 ms  34 ms
 9  national.gw.au (139.130.4.1)  31 ms  31 ms  31 ms
10  usa.gw.au (139.130.4.5)  32 ms  32 ms  32 ms
11  national.gw.au (139.130.4.1)  31 ms  31 ms  31 ms
12  usa.gw.au (139.130.4.5)  32 ms  33 ms  32 ms
13  national.gw.au (139.130.4.1)  32 ms  31 ms  32 ms
14  usa.gw.au (139.130.4.5)  34 ms  33 ms  32 ms
15  national.gw.au (139.130.4.1)  46 ms  32 ms  35 ms
16  usa.gw.au (139.130.4.5)  34 ms  114 ms  198 ms
17  national.gw.au (139.130.4.1)  198 ms  37 ms  35 ms
18  usa.gw.au (139.130.4.5)  47 ms  50 ms  34 ms
19  national.gw.au (139.130.4.1)  33 ms  33 ms  33 ms
20  usa.gw.au (139.130.4.5)  37 ms  35 ms  34 ms
21  national.gw.au (139.130.4.1)  35 ms  34 ms  33 ms
22  usa.gw.au (139.130.4.5)  36 ms  35 ms  36 ms
23  national.gw.au (139.130.4.1)  35 ms  34 ms  34 ms
24  usa.gw.au (139.130.4.5)  35 ms  34 ms  41 ms
25  national.gw.au (139.130.4.1)  35 ms  34 ms  34 ms
26  usa.gw.au (139.130.4.5)  34 ms  38 ms  38 ms
27  national.gw.au (139.130.4.1)  42 ms  38 ms  40 ms
28  usa.gw.au (139.130.4.5)  47 ms  40 ms  36 ms
29  national.gw.au (139.130.4.1)  35 ms  35 ms  36 ms
30  usa.gw.au (139.130.4.5)  38 ms  38 ms  36 ms

Quite a simple question. why ?

-jason
--

Jason Andrade	jason@coombs.anu.edu.au			irc: Morkeleb
		jason@sorokin.anu.edu.au
		jason@montebello.ecom.unimelb.edu.au
From: craig@kralizec.zeta.org.au (Craig Dewick)
Newsgroups: aus.aarnet
Subject: Re: Policy/Practices on providing modems ?
Keywords: modem policy practice unviversity
Date: 30 Sep 92 22:33:25 GMT
Organization: Kralizec Dialup Unix Sydney: +61-2-837-1183 V.32

dconnors@gucis.cit.gu.edu.au (David Connors) writes:

>gtricker@socs.uts.edu.au (Glenn Rickersey) writes:
>
>>UTS provides 6 modems for half-duplex access at a blazing
>>300bps with a small number of other modems around the place
>>with very restricted access.
>
>Doesn't sound too good!

I used to be a student at UTS several years ago (even then 300 bps was
considered lousy!!) when people started kicking up a serious stink
about the archaic dial-up access facilities for the CCSD's network.
 
At the time (and I still think the idea is being thrown around), it was
mooted to get rid of the direct dial-in access and use Austpac instead.
 
Of course, using Austpac costs us (ie, the users) big bickies, so very
few were supportive of the idea.
 
As ACSnet (and now AARnet) came into being, access to this net was
grudgingly made available to very few groups there. I was an electricla
engineering student, and even now EE students dont (as far as I'm aware)
have full access to AARnet facilities.

The CCSD have such a paranoic attitude towards students that they limit
access to resources to such a point that it's not worth bothering. I
think computer science and maths students get a much better deal in 
this regard.
-- 
Craig Dewick               | Railway Preservation Industries - Working to
craig@kralizec.zeta.org.au | Advance the Preservation of Australian Railways
From: nick@kralizec.zeta.org.au (Nick Andrew)
Newsgroups: aus.aarnet
Subject: Re: Proposal: OSI Addressing on AARnet
Date: 30 Sep 92 09:33:41 GMT
Organization: Kralizec Dialup Unix Sydney: +61-2-837-1183 V.32

mrp@itd.adelaide.edu.au (Mark Prior) writes:

>Pancho would have a NSAP allocated from the SA allocation of
>        39.036.1002.01.00.0800.0001.0012.AA00.0400.5648.00

I prefer IP numbers, not to mention domains!

Nick.
-- 
Kralizec Dialup Unix (Public Access)    Data: +61-2-837-1183, 14400 24hrs 8N1
Zeta Microcomputer Software             Data: +61-2-837-1868, 2400 24hrs 8N1
P.O. Box 177, Riverstone NSW 2765       Plan: To beat Gnuchess 4.1 !
-- 
Kralizec Dialup Unix (Public Access)    Data: +61-2-837-1183, 14400 24hrs 8N1
Zeta Microcomputer Software             Data: +61-2-837-1868, 2400 24hrs 8N1
P.O. Box 177, Riverstone NSW 2765       Plan: To beat Gnuchess 4.1 !
From: rossc@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (Ross Cartlidge)
Newsgroups: su.net,aus.aarnet
Subject: Metro addressing problems
Date: 26 Sep 92 23:36:39 GMT
Distribution: aus
Organization: Sydney University Computing Service, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Poeple are still having trouble connecting to metro
because their nameservers are returning a address 
which is no longer used.

The now deleted address for metro (129.78.139.4)
is still floating around. Could every one running
BIND please check their secondary files for
any mention of 129.78.139.4.

If you have it in ANY file comment the line out of the file AND
comment out the secondary entry for that file in your
named.boot. Then restart your nameserver.

Finally check to see if the string comes back.

I'll mail people when I think it is ok to take the comment
ou of the named.boot.

PS:

Does anyone know a better way of fixing this up -or
avoiding this in the future?

rossc
-- 
________________________________________________________________________
Ross Rodney Cartlidge			    |   rossc@ucc.su.oz.au
Information Services, H08		    |   Phone:     +61 2 6923491
University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia   |   FAX:       +61 2 6606557