HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hayes@kingkong.cis.ohio-state.edu (Patrick Hayes)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberspace
Subject: Re: Bruce Sterling & Cyberhemian Rhapsodies
Date: 9 Oct 92 20:23:49 GMT
	<7OCT199212074174@pavo.concordia.ca> <Bvv5FL.A5A@rice.edu>
Organization: Ohio State Computer Science
Originator: hayes@kingkong.cis.ohio-state.edu

In article <Bvv5FL.A5A@rice.edu> ratner@owlnet.rice.edu (Logan Joshua Ratner) writes:

   I think the issue is this.  Can a transfer protocal between Internet, Compuserve, etc.
   be created?  If so, could I access Compuserve from Interner (for example.)  Assume
   for the sake of argument I have accounts or access to both systems.

If I remember correctly, one already can access Compuserve from the internet,
tho you do have to have a Compuserve account so they can bill you.

PCH
Newsgroups: alt.cyberspace
From: joe@lamar.ColoState.EDU (Question Authority)
Subject: Re: Bruce Sterling & Cyberhemian Rhapsodies
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1992 05:57:48 GMT
Organization: Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO  80523

In article <7OCT199212074174@pavo.concordia.ca> se_schn@pavo.concordia.ca (SCHNAAR, SHELDON E.) writes:
>In article <1992Oct5.232618.3870@walter.cray.com>, jcarroll@ferris.cray.com (Jeff Carroll) writes...
>> 
>>> there is only one cyberspace.  the questions are:
>>> 1) can you afford to have your machine on the net?
>>> 2) can you afford to not have your machine on the net?
>>> 
>>Think about this: Do you see any Compuserve, Genie, or Prodigy subscribers
>>posting in this group? There's no more compelling reason keeping them out
>>than marketing strategy and bureaucratic government policy.
>> 
>
>I beg to differ as a GEnie subscriber I do not apreciate this kind of statement.
>You are overgeneratlizing.   You are, however, quite correct, IMO, that it is
                (Extemporaenous Shit Deleted)					>Also, I do NOT believe in the cyberspace, won't happen, no need, no use, to 
>expensive for nothing.
>

		That's probably why you're a GEnie subscriber.


				jOe.

>
From: merlin@freeside.com (Merlin the Idiot Magi)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberspace
Subject: Re: Compuserve
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 92 19:54:58 CDT
Organization: Rivendell BBS / Hou, TX. / +1 713 941 2236

[--- ikke! <A6014BB@HASARA11.BITNET> writes:

> In article <ayiNsB2w165w@freeside.com>, merlin@freeside.com (Merlin the Idiot
> Magi) says:
> >to train ourselves to use our eyes as children anyway.  The worst
> >stumbling block is fitting 720,000 (2 grids of 600X600 resolution)
> >electrodes into the human brain.  It could be... messy...
>  
> First of all, why would you connect 2 grids to a brain, doesn't our brain
> combine the two images we get visually anyway to a single image? Second,
> I think you are missing the point here. We are not talking about our brain
> being a stupid monitor which needs a grid to display an image, we are talking
> about a neural system that needs electrical pulses to make our brain imagine
> or construct a sensation on which we can base, from experience, what the
> outside world looks like. To connect to our brain we only have to connect
> to those nerves that are relevant, or that we can work with. In theory this
> could be only one nerve. With more nerves connected we could even interact
> with the image and create our own visual images just by thought. In short,
> our brain is too complex, or in fact too simple, to compare to a monitor.
>  
> Bjorn (bjorn@sara.nl)
>  
> >merlin@freeside.com (Merlin the Idiot Magi)
> >Rivendell BBS -*- Houston, TX -*- +1(713)941-2236
>  
>  
>  
>  

  Well, at the time, we were mostly just playing with umbers, We needed 
to figure out a reasonable resolution rate that we could easily make 
photo-realistic.  600X600 stuck.  2 grids are needed because we want a 
stereo image to work with.  You may not realize this, but depth 
perception of a very nice thing to have.  While it is true that we 
usually get our visual imput from a low-density source, we aren't THAT 
good at interpreting and modifying neural pathways, besides, the optic 
nerves come in at the front of the head, the visual cortex is in back and 
easier to get to.  No flame intended, but we did think these things out 
beforehand.  This jack is set to be used NOW, not in 30-50 eyars, I'm too 
damn impatent for that and I'll only be 40-60 by then...

--
merlin@freeside.com (Merlin the Idiot Magi)
Rivendell BBS -*- Houston, TX -*- +1(713)941-2236
From: merlin@freeside.com (Merlin the Idiot Magi)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberspace
Subject: Re: Compuserve
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 15:33:21 CDT
Organization: Rivendell BBS / Hou, TX. / +1 713 941 2236

kxgst1+@pitt.edu (Kenneth   Gilbert) writes:


[Stuff pn connecting Compuserve and Gibsonspace deleted]
> Finally, neural implants.  These things are not only possible, they are
> being used in specialized applications.  I recall reading an article a few
> years ago where scientists were able to connect a video image to the visual
> cortex of a blind patient.  This only provided shadow-like images, but I 
> can't imagine it will be too long before this is improved markedly.  
> 
> Ken Gilbert

  Oh good, I was waiting for someone to bring it up.  Excluding the 
medical knowledge, a crude, visual-only, DNI is possible today.  Research 
into restoring sight has given us the ability to install electrodes into 
the visual cortex, impress colors there, and give VERY basic images to 
the person.  This technology could all be worked together to allor 
someone to `jack in' and have non-visual feeds.  The system would 
probably use LOTS of little electrodes, and it would require training on 
the part of the user to get any sense of the visual messages, but we have 
to train ourselves to use our eyes as children anyway.  The worst 
stumbling block is fitting 720,000 (2 grids of 600X600 resolution) 
electrodes into the human brain.  It could be... messy...
  /// & ///

--
merlin@freeside.com (Merlin the Idiot Magi)
Rivendell BBS -*- Houston, TX -*- +1(713)941-2236
From: hughmann@cyberden.uucp
Newsgroups: alt.cyberspace
Subject: Re: Liberating Tech: Cybernomads
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 23:55:41 PDT
Organization: Indescribable Creations

> What'm curiou about iswhether anone wouldbe liningup to
> vounteer for the kind of invasive neurosurgeGibson taks
> about We may nt be too fr away frm the techology for
> some of that stuff.

Sorry about the missed characters, blame my term ware.

Yes, I would get in line.  I'd rather not be the experiment, but after 
the techniques proved out I'd be there.

A socket behind my ear, a PC sans keyboard and video could easily hand on 
(I meant hang) on a belt or strap to a leg, and have a battery life of 
several hours before recharge.

__________________________________________________________________________
   |       /         |\
   | H E   \ Y B E R |/ E N            [ hughmann@cyberden.uucp ]
From: hughmann@cyberden.uucp
Newsgroups: alt.cyberspace
Subject: Re: Bruce Sterling & Cyberhemian Rhapsodies
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 00:07:41 PDT
Organization: Indescribable Creations

> This iwhat bothrs me abou Gibson'svision of yberspace
> there is no practical reason whatsoev to make fnancial
>databases ccessibleon a publc network s a three-dimensional
> virtual object t can be atacked at ill by a intendo
> ockey.

I'm not going to defend Gibson's vision, because there were parts of that 
that bothered me as well.  However, I think it makes perfect sense for 
financial databases to be accessable "publicly" just as S.W.I.F.T. is 
today via phone lines.  Even if the actual transfers of cash data are 
separate, isolated connections, those connections still exist.  They can 
be comprimised.

__________________________________________________________________________
   |       /         |\
   | H E   \ Y B E R |/ E N            [ hughmann@cyberden.uucp ]
Newsgroups: alt.cyberspace
From: ratner@owlnet.rice.edu (Logan Joshua Ratner)
Subject: Re: Bruce Sterling & Cyberhemian Rhapsodies
Organization: Rice University
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 16:50:09 GMT

In article <7OCT199212074174@pavo.concordia.ca> se_schn@pavo.concordia.ca (SCHNAAR, SHELDON E.) writes:
>In article <1992Oct5.232618.3870@walter.cray.com>, jcarroll@ferris.cray.com (Jeff Carroll) writes...
>> 
>>> there is only one cyberspace.  the questions are:
>>> 1) can you afford to have your machine on the net?
>>> 2) can you afford to not have your machine on the net?
>>> 
>>> think about it.
>> 
>>Think about this: Do you see any Compuserve, Genie, or Prodigy subscribers
>>posting in this group? There's no more compelling reason keeping them out
>>than marketing strategy and bureaucratic government policy.
>> 
>
>I beg to differ as a GEnie subscriber I do not apreciate this kind of statement.
>You are overgeneratlizing.   You are, however, quite correct, IMO, that it is
>naive to believe in a one NETWORK world.  The Internet proves this.  Sure, it 
>connects lots of organizations all over the world, but it is not one net, it is
>a collection of nets.  I believe that this is the route that will be taken. 
>Also, I do NOT believe in the cyberspace, won't happen, no need, no use, to 
>expensive for nothing.
>
>


I think the issue is this.  Can a transfer protocal between Internet, Compuserve, etc.
be created?  If so, could I access Compuserve from Interner (for example.)  Assume
for the sake of argument I have accounts or access to both systems.

If this can be done, will it be done?  If yes, then arn't we back to the
single net hypothesis (I started in the first place.)

I'm not saying everything is integrated yet (though the phone lines are. You
can use whatever long-distance server you want but the calls still reace the
same nodes (i.e. phone numbers.))

What I am saying is it can happen. I might go so far as to say it will happen.

ratner
From: A6014BB@HASARA11.BITNET ([--- ikke!)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberspace
Subject: Re: ACM and Cyberspace
Date: 17 Oct 92 00:56:03 GMT
Organization: SARA - Stichting Academisch Rekencentrum Amsterdam

Yesterday, someone (DRasch?) said:John (Barlow) states that "...Cyberspace is,
 in its present condition, highly American in Culture and Lanaguage."
 
>I agree that American/English is used almost exclusively on the net, but is it
>highly American.  I would ask, "what are the signs of an american dominated
>cyberspace?  I have read mail from Africa to Antartica.  Other than the
>language, isn't this shared space an international zone of creativity?
>A whiteboard for mankind?  Or am I going to get flamed for being shortsighted?
 
No, I usually try not to flame anyone. If you believe in the existance of
an elementary form of cyberspace ( =internet/usenet), and you said that you
believe Cyberspace to be a whiteboard for (wo)mankind, I think you are
right in your definition. Because it is not the fact that Americans
predominate Cyberspace intentionally, it's just that the technology has
spread more in the US than any other country, and besides that there
are more Americans (in number) who have the technical know-how of how
to get to Internet, because there simply are more Americans than any
other Western nationality. Don't expect Ethopia to be full of
terminals connected to the Internet! As for the choice of English
as a communication aid - I think we made that decision long before
World War II...
 
>I use the word mankind on purpose, becasue I'm not sure what women's role's
>are
>in cyberspace?  Do we interact differently?  Don't we still have the same
>probl
>ems understaning each other in the new world?
 
I really don't want to go into this, because I'm not sure what the women's
role's are in cyberspace. I think though that they're pretty much the
same as man. I mean if they found their way to internet, we must have
something in common. (positively meant)
 
>
>Just a thought....  :-)
>
>Send Flames to DRasch@AUVM.American.edu
>
No flames intended,
Bjorn (bjorn@sara.nl)
 
All flames about my use of English will be ignored unless written
in perfect Dutch...
From: besler@geop.ubc.ca (Steve Besler)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberspace
Subject: Re: ACM and Cyberspace
Date: 17 Oct 1992 01:59:45 GMT
Organization: Geophysics & Astronomy, U.B.C. Vancouver, Canada
Distribution: world
Reply-To: besler@geop.ubc.ca
NNTP-Posting-Host: holo.geop.ubc.ca

Some guy writes:
> I have read mail from Africa to Antartica.

Antartica ????
really????

If so that's really cool!

Steve
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [eff.mail.cwis-l]  Re: Banned Computer Material 1992
Followup-To: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,eff.mail.cwis-l
Originator: kadie@eff.org
Organization: The Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 03:20:58 GMT

[A repost - Carl]

Newsgroups: eff.mail.cwis-l
From: CROSEN@OPIE.BGSU.EDU
Subject:  Re: Banned Computer Material 1992
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 23:19:00 GMT

Greetings,

The only remotely interesting aspect of this diatribe is the reference to
"community standards."  One wonders whether the traditional notion of
community based in geographic proximity is at all relevant to the
net.  Certainly, the notion that a university should restrict access to
information based on the possibility that a minor could gain access is
and ought to be anathema to all academics.  In point of fact,
universities and university libraries do protect the rights of their
students and scholars to use and disseminate information that some find
offensive (including information having to do with sex).

It's clear the poster believes that sysops, by virtue of their control
over a machine, ought to be able to violate important aspects of
academic freedom.  This is nonsense tantamount to suggesting that the
person who oversees the typing room (in institutions that still have
them) should be able to regulate the content of the materials typed.
The job of a sysop is, or ought to be, to keep the plumbing working;
faculties ought to decide what kind of shit runs through the pipes.

Marty
-- 
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
 =kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: CAF gopher
Originator: kadie@eff.org
Organization: The Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 20:10:10 GMT

The CAF gopher is set up. For browsing the archive, I think it is great --
much better than anonymous ftp.

If you are lucky, all you need to do to access it is to type the command:
   gopher gopher.eff.org
then selection menu option 4.

- Carl

p.s. If you can't do anonymous ftp's then you can't access it. If you
can do anonymous ftp's but your machine doesn't have a "gopher" client
installed:

[from Chris Davis' note]
>Gopher clients are available for Mac, NeXT, GNU Emacs, X11, VM/CMS, VMS,
>and curses interfaces.  Many of these are available for anonymous ftp from
>boombox.micro.umn.edu in pub/gopher.  Those without clients can telnet to
>consultant.micro.umn.edu and login as "gopher" to try it out.  (EFF's
>Gopher server is listed under "Other Gopher and Information Servers".)
-- 
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
 =kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
Xref: sparky alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk:3153 comp.org.eff.talk:6376 comp.admin.policy:1293 alt.censorship:8030 soc.college:4248
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.org.eff.talk,comp.admin.policy,alt.censorship,soc.college
Subject: Re: Banned Computer Material 1992
From: ron@zooid.guild.org (Secret Mud)
Date: 10 Oct 92 14:45:18 GMT

From: morgan@ms.uky.edu (Wes Morgan)
>
>My apologies; when reading your original message, I got the impression
>that your trap program was explicitly made publicly readable.
>
>There's no excuse for the tech using system privileges to examine your
>stuff UNLESS he/she had been directed to do so by 'the boss'; in that case,
>your beef is with the managment, not the tech.  8)
>
>Years ago, I was in a similar situation; I was learning languages other than 
>the one for which I was given access, and my stuff started disappearing mys-
>teriously.  Of course, the fact that I'd found a way to implement networked 
>printing 'off the cuff' could have had something to do with it.....8)
>
>--Wes
>

This was a number of years ago.  (14 years?  OhMyGawd...)  My worst "sin" was 
being off their curve for internal budgeting.  They had pseudo-dollar amounts
for each department, based on CPU seconds of usage.  (HP3000)

Most students spent many minutes (hours!) typing in assignments, doing brief
compiles, trying to fix typing errors...  A very low ratio of CPU seconds to
connect minutes.

I wrote program that ate quite a few CPU seconds (in the evening), with less
connect minutes spent searching the keyboard.

I never could make them undestand that CPU time wasn't like an amount of money
to be spent or saved.  It was like a waterfall.  It was going to keep running
even if nobody stuck a waterwheel under it.  Ah, the bad old days of computer
scarcity...
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@herodotus.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [comp.admin.policy] Re: Display of nudes
Followup-To: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.admin.policy
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 02:44:46 GMT

[A repost - Carl]

Newsgroups: comp.admin.policy
From: thornley@pico.cs.umn.edu (David H. Thornley)
Subject: Re: Display of nudes
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 23:11:05 GMT

In article <1992Oct9.185121.12205@rz.uni-karlsruhe.de> S_TITZ@iravcl.ira.uka.de (Olaf Titz) writes:
>In <1992Oct9.010021.18858@eff.org> kadie@eff.org writes:
>
>>  Question [inspired by an email message]:
>>  
>>  What should sys admins do about nude pictures and displays of nude
>>  pictures in public terminal rooms? Is a special rule banning such
>>  pictures and/or displays needed?
>
>This is from our (Uni Karlsruhe Comp. Center) HP Workstation Manual:
>(note that other departments have policies not that restrictive)
>
>"Use of the workstations not related to scientific research and
>education, especially playing games and the abuse of graphic displays
>for displaying non-work-related pictures, is prohibited. This is to
>explicitly notify you that abuse can result in account revocation."
>
This is similar to the case where all you have is vt100s, so that you
can't create offensive images (at least, not without creativity and
effort, I'm sure I know people who could).  In this case, all images
not used for actual research and education are banned, which includes
images both innocuous and offensive.

Do you have any plans for when this doesn't work?  Right now, I have
four large and four small windows on my Sun, most of which are devoted
to my academic work (all but the one I'm running news in, in fact).
As a backdrop, I have an image that some might find faintly subversive.
There's no obvious reason why I couldn't have one that some would find
sexually offensive.  This problem could affect any workstation permitting
backdrops, no matter how strict the rules on usage are.

The response in this Computer Science department to the display of nudes
was to inform people that display of these images in public labs etc.
could be considered a form of sexual harassment, which is against both
state law and the student conduct code.  I think this is reasonable:
ban the action, not the potentiality, and let the users be responsible
(morally and legally) for their own actions.

DHT

T

--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: fwp@CC.MsState.Edu (Frank Peters)
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.org.eff.talk,comp.admin.policy,alt.censorship,soc.college
Subject: Re: Sysadmin for a Day, was Re: Banned Computer Material 1992
Date: 9 Oct 92 20:09:56 GMT
Organization: Computing Center, Mississippi State University

In article <1992Oct9.151746.15783@news.columbia.edu> dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis) says:
: 
:     I think there is a better way to stop the execution of Crack. It is the
: same thing used to halt runaway programs written by students. Have a policy
: of CPU time limits on processes. They do that at Columbia's central computer
: center (I'm in the bio department).

Huh?  What if you want users to be able to run simulations of gum wrappers
in a wind tunnel but still don't want them running crack?

Yes, crack is moderately CPU intensive.  But, unless a machine is
dedicated to "light" tasks like email and news reading it is unlikely to
be more CPU intensive than a lot of other "legitimate" programs. 

:     This means a content neutral ban that will effectively stop students from
: using Crack. It really sucks up the computer time. I run it regularly even
: though I am not the sysadmin here. The last time I did a complete run, it
: used about 10000 CPU minutes (on an otherwise idle workstation).

But it means none of your users can do anything else that is as big as
or bigger than Crack.

:     Of course, it is by running Crack yourself that you make your system
: safe. There is very little stopping anyone on your system from running
: Crack on thier own machines at home or something.

A lot of UNIX systems (most?) now support some sort of shadow password
system even if it isn't on by default.  If your users can't get at your
passwords then Crack does them no good.

You still have a policy issue though, since users can run Crack on your
system to crack some other system's passwords.
--
Frank Peters  -  UNIX Systems Programmer  -  Mississippi State University
Internet: fwp@CC.MsState.Edu  -  Phone: (601)325-7030  -  FAX: (601)325-8921
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis)
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.admin.policy
Subject: Re: Display of nudes
Date: 9 Oct 92 15:31:46 GMT
Organization: Columbia University, Dept. of Biological Sciences.

In article <1992Oct9.010021.18858@eff.org> kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>Question [inspired by an email message]:
>
>What should sys admins do about nude pictures and displays of nude
>pictures in public terminal rooms? Is a special rule banning such
>pictures and/or displays needed?
[...]

>  2) If anyone engages in what appears to be sexual harassment,
>       * warn them informally (at your discretion)
>       * charge them with sexual harassment (or tell the harassed
>         person how to charge them) following your schools's sexual
>         harassment procedure.
>
    I'm a little concerned about the words 'appears'. Isn't it true that
for it to be harrasment, there must be either a complaint, or a situation
where it is obvious (such as a number of people running acreaming out of
the terminal room).
    Of course, the sysadmin may be the one who feels they are harrased, but
the 'appears' words seems to indicate that you could be warned or charged
by a sysadmin who does a ps, and sees 'igif ds-x-003.gif' being executed
by you. It may be in violation of the rules if there are other people in
the room. With something as ephemeral as a computer screen, can something
count as 'public' if there is noone else there at the time?

DanZ

-- 
    "I think it is a little premature to attribute the failures of American
     foriegn policy to Carl Kadie."
                                                     -Mike Godwin
This article for entertainment purposes only.
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.admin.policy