HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Jim.Riddle@inns.omahug.org (Jim Riddle)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Testing Computer Prof
Date: 16 Dec 92 05:51:14 CST
Reply-To: jim.riddle@inns.omahug.org
Organization: Inns of Court, Papillion, NE
Followup-To: comp.org.eff.talk

Reply to Don Bivens, who pointed out that professional engineers
frequently design structures that people will inhabit but that code is
different.
 
Back in the old days, I used to work on some interesting code.  Part of
it was for the Army, part of it was for the Air Force, all of it dealt
with situations that I would just as soon never see actually happen, all
of it was what we termed "mission critical."
 
The designer had to ensure that ALL possible alternatives were covered. 
We had to pass the 500-pound-gorilla-on-the-keyboard tests and a few
other things.  When 2,000,000 Russian soldiers were rushing through the
Fulda Gap was NOT going to be the time to see "This feature not yet
implemented.  Contact system engineering for further assistance."
 
Likewise, the design of 911 systems, for example, has seemed to me to be
something that has been a little lax. In deference to the fact that most
of the Bell-related code that I've seen is pretty good, I know for a fact
where some of it is NOT pretty good.
 
In these cases, it is also imperative for reasons of the public health
and safety that the design and implementation be appropriate, and it is
equally important that some one person certify that the design occurred
under their supervision and they are responsible for it. 
 
Jim
From: Jim.Riddle@inns.omahug.org (Jim Riddle)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Testing Computer Professionals 
Date: 15 Dec 92 06:14:18 CST
Reply-To: jim.riddle@inns.omahug.org
Organization: Inns of Court, Papillion, NE
Followup-To: comp.org.eff.talk

I agree with you, which I didn't explicitly state before, about how
little engineering actually goes on in software engineering.
 
I disagree though with your comments about PE registration.  I am not a
civil engineer, yet I find it both worthwhile and necessary in the work I
do (mining and environmental).  I see your comments about weak people
being registered, apparently in Pennsylvania about the time of Three Mile
Island.  I was registered in Pennsylvania about then ( a couple of years
before it, actually), and was not really impressed.
 
If weak engineers were actually completing the process and you, as, I
infer, strong engineers were left, then why didn't you finish or attempt
to kick the bums out?  I guess I look at that argument the same way I
look at those folks who tell me they had everything but the dissertation
and could've finished their Ph.D. any time they wanted to do so.  yeah. 
right. uh-huh.
 
How's things in "May-retta"?  I have a friend from my SDI days
(Huntsville) who is from Marietta and works for Georgia Tech, now
(designs helicopters and such).
 

Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis)
Subject: Re: ISDN rates
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation Tech Central
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 19:47:14 GMT

DB> == David "Network Man" Benson <dbenson@csugrad.cs.vt.edu>

 DB> I contacted my local phone company (C&P) about having an ISDN line
 DB> installed in my apartment (for the purpose of connecting to campus's
 DB> network). I was quoted a $300 installation charge, $58 per month, plus
 DB> $0.05 per minute. Are these rates fair (average)? 

They're a lot higher than the Massachusetts tariff.  Installation I don't
know offhand (I'll know in January when my home line goes in); $8/mo plus
$5/mo extra per data-capable B channel (so either $13 or $18) over and
above your normal POTS charges for a single line of that class [about $20
for an unmeasured relatively-wide-area residential line, but no TouchTone
charges with ISDN].  Per-minute *data* charges are under 2c (it winds up
being about $1/hr, it's the business measured voice rate).  Voice rates are
the same as before (in this case, unmeasured local calling).

 DB> We had hoped to run a nearly permanent slip connection and at
 DB> $0.05/min that would be nearly $27,000 per year. A T1 connection would
 DB> only have been $600/mo for 1.5mbps. The ISDN connection would have
 DB> been from my apartment to the CO, about 3-4 miles (although there is a
 DB> fiber optics "hut" about a mile a way). Thanks.

"Nearly permanent" is still a better deal for a leased line in most areas.
It depends on the tariffs, though.
--
Christopher K. Davis      | ``Usenet seems to run much like the Kif (or,
<ckd@eff.org>   EFF #14   |   for the TV generation, Klingon) high command.
System Administrator, EFF |   Whoever takes action and can be heard wins.''
+1 617 864 0665  [CKD1]   |   --Peter da Silva <peter@ferranti.com>
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: paul@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu (Paul Pomes - UofIllinois CSO)
Subject: Re: Fun things to do to RTM
Reply-To: Paul-Pomes@uiuc.edu
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 04:36:02 GMT

mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:

>                                                          Frankly,
>your behaviour here has convinced me that you wouldn't know ethics if
>they came up and bit you on the ass.

Now there's a textbook example of the pot calling the kettle black.

*plonk*
-- 
Necessity is the argument of tyrants, it is the creed of slaves.
	--William Pitt (1783)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: brad@clarinet.com (Brad Templeton)
Subject: Re: 2600 Pentagon City Mall "bust"
Organization: ClariNet Communications Corp.
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 22:54:35 GMT

The problem is that rights are different and complex in private public
spaces, such as mall food courts.  I expect Sherri might clear this up
with a posting on some of the history of this, but what I have read indicates:

a) Malls are not entirely private, ie. you don't surrender all the rights you
would surrender going into a private home, because there is an implicit or
explicit invitation to the public to enter a mall.


wall, not on the net!) a list of certain surrendered rights.  Plaques
saying things like you are subject to search or eviction for violation of
mall rules etc.  I am not sure about seizure.

c) There are limits on what those mall rules can be.  They can't discriminate
against you on the basis of race, sex, etc.   However, there are all kinds
of totally legal activities which they can forbid.

My guess is that unsanctioned meetings are one of them.  After all, one
of the main businesses of private places that are open to the public is
selling meeting space.  Not so much at malls as at halls and hotels, and
they certainly have the right to control who can have meetings there and
how.

To go beyond these vague details, perhaps somebody who has studied the
varied case-law can give more.

This status, by the way is something that we as a society have asked for.
We like the safe, organized and controlled nature of private malls,
and we abandoned the public malls and downtowns for them.

In the online world there's an interesting contrast.   Prodigy is safe
and organized and edited -- and that is what many people want.  Others
want unsafe, unedited, noisy and free environments like this net.  Some
prefer something in the middle, like GEnie.
-- 
Brad Templeton, ClariNet Communications Corp. -- Sunnyvale, CA 408/296-0366
From: kd1hz@anomaly.sbs.com (Michael P. Deignan)
Subject: Re: 2600 Pentagon City Mall "bust"
Organization: Small Business Systems, Incorporated, Smithfield, RI 02917
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 04:54:43 GMT

skipm@dorsai.com (Skip Mac-Stoker) writes:

>Let's see here - we have the illegal breakup of a public meeting (isn't that
>unconsitutional?), illegal seizure, and harassment. Nothing like your tax
>dollars hard at work for you. Absolutely disgusting. Once again, there are
>those individuals in the guv who feel what they cannot control, they must
>destroy. <sigh>

1. Private property, not "public".

2. No "tax dollars" involved, just local police-authority-wannabes hired by
   the maul. 

3. No "government" officials, unless you count the one VA police officer
   which someone said was there.

Please read the facts and get them straight when you post.

MD
-- 
--  Michael P. Deignan                      / Sex is hereditary. If your 
--  Domain: mpd@anomaly.sbs.com            /  parents never had it, chances 
-- AT&TNet: +1 401 273 4669               /   are you won't either...
-- Telebit: +1 401 455 0347              /
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Fun things to do to RTM (was: Internet worm)
Date: 14 Dec 92 18:44:22 GMT
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc

In <1gfgjtINNb91@terminator.rs.itd.umich.edu> honey@citi.umich.edu (Peter Honeyman) writes:

>fred j mccall asks:
>|> Is there any doubt that Morris released the Worm deliberately
>|> (whatever his intentions were with regard to it causing loss or
>|> damage) and that he deliberately intended for it to enter other
>|> peoples' systems and od things without permission?

>based on discussions with people who were there at the time and other
>personal knowledge, i am under the impression that the release of the 
>worm to the internet at large was accidental.

I'm kind of curious as to how one writes and releases a worm by
accident.  How do you explain the code that was intended to misdirect
'pursuers' from following it back by pointing them at another
computer? 

[I'm referring to the 'call back' code to the Berkeley (?) computer
that the Worm contained.]

-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
From: Wes.Perkhiser@ivgate.omahug.org (Wes Perkhiser)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Professional registration
Date: 20 Dec 92 07:50:24 CST
Reply-To: wes.perkhiser@ivgate.omahug.org
Organization: 
Followup-To: comp.org.eff.talk

In a message of <Dec 18 12:40>, Ralph 'Hairy' Moonen writes:

 R'M>person wihout a degree, but with a good job, I make the following 
 R'M>observation:

 R'M>- A lot of people on the net have no formal education
 R'M>- most of them have jobs, and a majority of those who have jobs, 
 R'M>have
 R'M>  good jobs.

I think that the reason most of the people on the net have good jobs is 
because the resources needed to access the net require either:
  1)  Lots of money
  2)  A large(r) organization
  3)  Knowing someone with either of the above
And, again, a good job (by a 'computer nerd' definition) will entail 
meeting one of the above.

Wes 


Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: mdw@db.TC.Cornell.EDU (Matt Welsh)
Subject: Re: Licencing of computer professionals
Organization: The Linux Inquisition, Propaganda Division
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 01:05:08 GMT

In article <1992Dec11.064217.21806@samba.oit.unc.edu> jem@sunSITE.unc.edu (Jonathan Magid) writes:
>In article <1992Dec11.054110.8618@tc.cornell.edu> mdw@db.TC.Cornell.EDU (Matt Welsh) writes:
>>Perhaps institutions that wish to hire responsible 
>>programmers or system administrators should require a few common-sense
>>prerequisites, like some kind of degree from an educational institution,
>
>I'm sure Bill Gates is glad that a computer science degree or any degree
>for that matter was not a "common sense prerequisite" when he was starting
>out.

You're missing the point, old chap. I'm not saying that ALL programmers
should be required to have such credentials. Only those positions that
deal with extremely SENSITIVE issues might require some kind of credentials.

>I have no doubt that eventually the hacking business will become regulated
>by such prerequisites, but must we be in such a rush?

There's no license for hacking. This is my point exactly.

>Does anyone actually have any evidence that a degree proves programming
>ability? How much less than for a licensing test.

Not ability. A degree doesn't prove anything. What we're essentially
concerned with proving is responsibility. Nothing can guarantee that,
of course. But we assume that if someone is able to satisfy the
requirements for a college degree (or some other certification) then
they might be responsible enough to handle working in sensitive
situations. Of course, this is only true in theory.

mdw

-- 
Matt Welsh     mdw@tc.cornell.edu     Cornell Theory Center
  "Go on, emote! I was raised on thought balloons!"
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: mdw@db.TC.Cornell.EDU (Matt Welsh)
Subject: Re: Licencing of computer professionals
Organization: The Linux Inquisition, Propaganda Division
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 23:39:13 GMT

In article <bhayden.724494481@teal> bhayden@teal.csn.org (Bruce Hayden) writes:
>mdw@db.TC.Cornell.EDU (Matt Welsh) writes:
>>In article <Bz89rD.LH8@ddsw1.mcs.com> karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger) writes:
>>>In article <1992Dec11.054110.8618@tc.cornell.edu> mdw@db.TC.Cornell.EDU (Matt Welsh) writes:
>
>It may be true that almost all classes require some hands on. However,
>that does not mean that you actually get any experience. 

This is true. My motto is, "The only way to learn how to program is to
program." I know people who read books on a given programming language
and claim to know the language. 

>Well, as mentioned above, a degree (even a MS degree) doesn't ensure
>anything of the sort.

Hands-on is the best way to go. Unfortunately, most employers require
some kind of degree-- the smart ones look more closely at actual 
experience (be it personal or professional).

mdw

-- 
Matt Welsh     mdw@tc.cornell.edu     Cornell Theory Center
  "It's a Katana, ya Midwestern Computer Geek." --Tom Payne
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.censorship,isu.cc.general,isu.talk.usenet-policy
From: brad@clarinet.com (Brad Templeton)
Subject: Re: WELL anonymity policy
Organization: ClariNet Communications Corp.
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 21:56:28 GMT

In article <1gpee1INN9l7@agate.berkeley.edu> spp@zabriskie.berkeley.edu (Steve Pope) writes:
>Now, it's possible I don't have the entire story straight,
>but if the above is true it strikes me as somewhat
>bogus.  I mean, it would appear that not all users are
>provided with the same level of service, based on... what?
>Somebody's arbitrary decision.  Is it reasonable for
>a professional access service to do this?  I have some
>doubts.

I have some bad news for you.  If you don't like this, you're in trouble.
It's a trivial affair compared to what really goes on.

All the big online services give *free* accounts to famous people -- not
just some minor perk like anonymity.   Most commonly they give free
accounts in special areas -- for example, if you're a famous Science Fiction
Writer, you can get free access to the SF areas on some online services.
Sometimes they give free access to the whole system as an incentive to
have a worthwhile person on the system, where worthwhile is in their
subjective judgement.

And I see nothing wrong with this, nor can I imagine why you see anything
wrong with the Well's practice.
-- 
Brad Templeton, ClariNet Communications Corp. -- Sunnyvale, CA 408/296-0366
Newsgroups: gagme.general,comp.org.eff.talk
From: datec@gagme.chi.il.us (Charles Robinson)
Subject: Hacker Crackdown
Originator: @gagme
Organization: GAGME - Public Access UNIX of Chicago, Illinois, USA, Earth
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 17:48:49 GMT

Hacker Crackdown by Bruce Sterling (Bantam ISBN 0-553-08058-X)
is now available in your local bookstores ---- $23.00.

IMHO A good read --- well worth it as an XMAS gift to your net friends.
From: Michael.Lutas@p918.f70.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Michael Lutas)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Fun things to do to RTM (was: Internet worm)
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 19:10:30 PDT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:109/70.918 - No Montgomery Co Na, Rockville MD

In a msg on <Dec 10 13:49>, Douglas Floyd of 1:105/42 writes:

 DF> RTM got caught, Dark Avenger is protected by the Bulgarian 
 DF> government, and
 DF> NEVER will be caught.  (I heard this somewhere.  Please, correct 
 DF> if wrong.)

As Erich Honecker now knows, never is a very long time...


--  
uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!109!70.918!Michael.Lutas
Internet: Michael.Lutas@p918.f70.n109.z1.fidonet.org
From: pcl@ox.ac.uk (Paul C Leyland)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.privacy,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.security.misc
Subject: Re: CERT and the Dept. of Justice on keystroke monitoring
Date: 18 Dec 92 10:29:28 GMT
	<e6TZ03sdc2.200@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com>
	<1992Dec12.064534.3499@nic.csu.net>
	<26Cu03elc3du00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com>
	<PCL.92Dec15173300@rhodium.ox.ac.uk>
	<1992Dec16.211155.19172@klaava.Helsinki.FI>
Organization: Oxford University Computing Services, 13 Banbury Rd Oxford OX2
	6NN
In-reply-to: viljanen@klaava.Helsinki.FI's message of 16 Dec 92 21:11:55 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.211155.19172@klaava.Helsinki.FI> viljanen@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Lea Viljanen) writes:
] In <PCL.92Dec15173300@rhodium.ox.ac.uk> pcl@ox.ac.uk (Paul C Leyland) writes:

] >In article <26Cu03elc3du00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> grjost@uts.amdahl.com (Garrett Jost) writes:

] >   I'll leave on this note:  On many systems, if you mail a letter to a non-
] >   existent user, the message gets sent back, but a copy also goes to
] >   "postmaster".  So if you mistype a friend's e-mail address and write
] >   he/she a very personal message, it isn't very personal anymore, is it?

] >For this very reason, I made very strong requests to our mail guru to
] >fix it for Postmaster to get only the mail headers.  She did, and now
] >only the originator gets the message body.  I, as joint-postmaster
] >still get to see the headers in case they indicate problems with the
] >system.  Still not ideal privacy, perhaps, but better than the
] >alternative.

] This is a two edged sword here. By enhancing the user's privacy
] you also diminish their chances to get information. Just guess
] how many internet guides tell people to mail postmaster@site
] to get information about e-mail addresses. These mail messages
] get truncated too.


I'm sorry, my comment was not phrased very well.  The message body
only gets omitted from mailer-generated failure messages.


DIRECT MAIL TO POSTMASTER IS DELIVERED TO POSTMASTER IN ITS ENTIRITY.


] It's not altogether obvious where to cut off the rest of 
] the the mail message either.

] >I strongly recommend that everyone else either fixes their mailer
] >similarly, or gets their Postmaster to fix it.

] I strongly recommend everybody to at least think this carefully over.

] I think the best solution would be to encrypt the message body
] (by rot-13 or something) to eliminate the accidental reading
] of the message. But the message in its entirety should be available
] to the Postmaster if he/she needs it. 


Maybe.  However, it still allows Postmaster to snoop with great ease.
Our solution requires that Postmaster must explicitly seek out mail addressed
and delivered to the originator.

Paul

--
Paul Leyland <pcl@oxford.ac.uk>          | Hanging on in quiet desperation is
Oxford University Computing Service      |     the English way.
13 Banbury Road, Oxford, OX2 6NN, UK     | The time is come, the song is over.
Tel: +44-865-273200  Fax: +44-865-273275 | Thought I'd something more to say.
Finger pcl@black.ox.ac.uk for PGP key    |
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.privacy,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.security.misc
From: ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis)
Subject: Re: CERT and the Dept. of Justice on keystroke monitoring
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation Tech Central
	<e6TZ03sdc2.200@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com>
	<1992Dec12.064534.3499@nic.csu.net>
	<26Cu03elc3du00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com>
	<PCL.92Dec15173300@rhodium.ox.ac.uk>
	<1992Dec16.211155.19172@klaava.Helsinki.FI>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 03:34:49 GMT

LV> == Lea Viljanen <viljanen@klaava.Helsinki.FI>

 LV> This is a two edged sword here. By enhancing the user's privacy you
 LV> also diminish their chances to get information. Just guess how many
 LV> internet guides tell people to mail postmaster@site to get information
 LV> about e-mail addresses. These mail messages get truncated too.

The configuration here is to send error returns (in addition to sending
them to the original sender of course) to mailer-errors@eff.org.  That is a
script which hacks off the body of the bounce and sends the headers on to
postmaster.  Mail to postmaster is not altered in any way.

This seems to be a good compromise.

The mailer-errors script is somewhat stupid, but works (since the only mail
it gets is from a known version of the mailer, it's fairly easy to make it
work right for this environment).
--
Christopher K. Davis      | ``Usenet seems to run much like the Kif (or,
<ckd@eff.org>   EFF #14   |   for the TV generation, Klingon) high command.
System Administrator, EFF |   Whoever takes action and can be heard wins.''
+1 617 864 0665  [CKD1]   |   --Peter da Silva <peter@ferranti.com>
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: skipm@dorsai.com (Skip Mac-Stoker)
Subject: Re: 2600 Pentagon City Mall "bust"
Organization: The Dorsai Embassy +1.718.729.5018
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 06:59:26 GMT

Ooops! Looks like I mailed my response! 

Let's see here - we have the illegal breakup of a public meeting (isn't that
unconsitutional?), illegal seizure, and harassment. Nothing like your tax
dollars hard at work for you. Absolutely disgusting. Once again, there are
those individuals in the guv who feel what they cannot control, they must
destroy. <sigh>

SKip
From: bhayden@teal.csn.org (Bruce Hayden)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Professional registration
Date: 17 Dec 92 15:41:12 GMT
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.

morpheus@entropy.mcds.com (morpheus) writes:

>Jim.Riddle@inns.omahug.org (Jim Riddle) writes:

>> I'm personally tired of hearing from all of these people who could've
>> gotten college degrees if they wanted to do so.  I'd like to know why
>> they didn't and why they seem to hold it against we who did!

>Lack of money could be a hell of a good reason.

I don't agree. I have gotten 2 degrees since I last had any help from
the government or parents (MBA and JD). I am working on 2 more. These
are all at private schools. 

Your problem is the assumption that once you enter the work force that
you can quit learning. Continuing education of the adult population has
been the growth field in education in the 1980's and will in all 
probability continue.

As I work on a PhD in CS, I am working full time, and raising a family.
No one is paying for my education except for me. If I can do it,
so can you.

Bruce E. Hayden
(303) 758-8400
bhayden@csn.org
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: jthomas@kolanut.mitre.org (Joe Thomas)
Subject: Re: Caller ID solution? (was Re: ACLU/EFF and Scanner restrictions?)
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 13:22:35 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.202930.12470@netcom.com> strnlght@netcom.com (David  
Sternlight) writes:
> Joe Thomas incorrectly attributes an article about a PBX in the basement
> to me.
> 
> I did not write that.
> 
> I don't have a PBX.
> 
> I would never be a party to helping others beat caller ID.

Sorry.  Chris Fedde <chris@engineer.mrg.uswest.com> was the author of the  
article I incorrectly attributed to Mr. Sternlight.  The Fedde article was a  
reply to a Sternlight article that made a minor change to my Caller ID idea.   
I quoted both in my article and switched the authors.  Again, sorry for any  
confusion.

Joe