HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wwallace@ucrengr.ucr.edu (wayne wallace)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: I need a irc server listing AND the FAQ.
Date: 18 Nov 92 02:17:20 GMT
Organization: University of California, Riverside

Like the subject says: I need a irc server listing AND the FAQ.

I don't read this group normally, so if some kind soul would just email
them to me, I'd be quite happy.

Wayne


-- 
*    // Only /\      |Lord Zar,Commander Of All He Surveys|Stay Alert! Trust  *
*\\ //      /--\MIGA |(and hater of spaces near commas.)  |No One! Keep--AHHHH*
* \X/ Internet: atra@galaxy.ucr.edu wwallace@ucrengr.ucr.edu GEnie:W.WALLACE9 *
* I'm a Purple Hearts & Yellow Moons kinda guy; I'm vay-teeng for you, dahlink*
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil (Tim Miller)
Subject: Re: And on the subject of Internet bandwidth...
Organization: AL/HRTI, Brooks AFB
	<BEH.92Nov22192521@acs.nntp-read.bu.edu> <mark.722494838@coombs>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 14:32:56 GMT

On 23 Nov 92 05:00:38 GMT, mark@coombs.anu.edu.au (Mark) said:

 M> Not necessarily. I read a while ago that the .mil net isnt exactly
 M> state of the art speed wise, and a lot of it is "slow" 56 K links
 M> from way back.  I cant remember the exact reasons, something about
 M> reliability or similar but it would account for any largish ping
 M> times.

	Exactly.  Getting out of milnet usually adds up to 2 seconds to
any packet's time.

	In addition, MilNet policy is not to allow reverse resolution of
IP addresses.  The official position is that reverse resolution is
"insecure."  I maintain that being on a public *network* is more a
security risk than reverse-resolving the darn names, but I don't make
policy. 

 M> Anyway if the guy likes #bondage let him be :) He wont mind next
 M> time he's captured and staked to the ground :)

	Actually, I use it to hone my interrogation techniques.

-- Cerebus <tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil>
"90% of my time on IRC is idle anyway; I use it like I use Gnus-- spare
 time waiting for things, and as a resource to solve problems with our
 machines."
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: mkwg9074@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (M. K. Weaver)
Subject: Re: Bots, WarBots, Fun?
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 05:27:26 GMT


>troy@cbme.unsw.EDU.AU (Troy Rollo) writes:

>>I see. So what you're trying to say here is that you now support "Vanity"
>>servers too?

avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au
>I believe this thread was on clients and bots - not servers.

>Stick to it and apply what I said with the thread and you'll be fine.

>avalon


	Speaking of sticking to the thread...does anyone recall
	the original message and the suggestion that has been
	totally forgotten <I do...but maybe that is because I
	orginated it>

	It does have something to do with "Attitudes" I suggested
	that after meeting a person who created a "warbot" that
	such mentality might be more appropriate for a place that
	was meant for more of this type of entertainment such
	as some muds. And that bots that allowed for creative
	expression and did not take away from the computer 
	mediated communication for IRC should be allowed, tolerated,
	created, <whatever other verb you may use to say accepted>.

	I do agree that I don't want my communication interupted...
	nor would I want something I created to interupt someone's
	communication. Maybe this means that bots should only
	speak when spoken to? Or that those AI that like to be chatty
	should be on channel's for people who want to visit with them.

	About "owning" the channels...Titus maybe bots are a reflection
	of the creator wanting "squatter's rights" to a channel.  
	<totally off the topic, myself>
	The question of "owning" also comes into play with "nicks"
	I have seen IRCops say..."No one owns a nick" Yet there is
	registration of nicks. I have only seen registration used 
	with things that people own such as cars and guns. Is there
	a registration precident for things that are not owned? If
	not are we actually doing a diservice and giving a false
	impression to people by allowing them to register their
	nicks? As a person who loves to create nicks...and ircnames
	I consider these part of me...almost in need of copyright.
	And I truly resent people using my nicks to parade as me
	<least amount of damage> or to get people to give out secrets
	<most amount of damage>. I do not however mind giving access
	to those who just plain want to use the nick without having
	knowledge that it belongs to me.

	<ugh> I am being wordy...guess I just miss you all <waves>
	bfn,
	Monica	
-- 
"When you sit with a nice girl for two hours, you think it is only a minute.
But when you sit on a hot stove for a minute, you think it's two hours.
THAT'S RELATIVITY." (Albert Einstein)
                 "My name is Monica. Got a minute?"
From: dougmc@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Doug McLaren)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: A new (very simple) bot solution
Date: 23 Nov 92 07:25:27 GMT
Organization: Doug's House of Disco

Dweiss@chiba.hughes.american.edu (Dan Weiss) writes:

>Ok.  Here it is (take a deep breath.)
>Make the IRC network only allow one login from each address.  

Bad idea, at least the way things work now.
Nick collisions are bad enough.  Then we'd have login collisions too.
I don't like Bozo here ... I'll just fake his login, run a bot w/ it, and
Bozo can't get onto IRC.  Or if I ran a server, I could fake his entire
user@host ... could keep anybody off of IRC.

I see this as being far too easy to abuse.  Besides, there are accounts that
are being used by more than one person.  This entire idea is flawed from the
very start.  No 'technical' solution is going to solve the bot 'problem' for
good.  The best solution (the best 'immediate' solution) would be for
individual server admins to start a 'No bots' or a 'No auto-opping bots' or
a 'No more than one bot run by one person on one channel' policy, to be
policed by the the server runners, perhaps with a kill or two to start, and
K-lines for those that had been warned repeatedly.  Of course, then they
would move to different servers, who may or may not follow a similar policy.
Eventually, if enough servers participated, all the bots would end up on
a few servers, which could be /squitted, or at least vacated by the humans
on IRC.  And if not enough server admins participated, well, then obviously
the anti-bot sentiment wasn't strong enough.

Of course, this all depends on the admin of each server agreeing on a common
goal.  From what I've seen, that's highly unlikely.  Each admin is free to 
either provide a useful service, to be a tyrannical dictator, or anything
in between.

   Doug
   Just say no to Assholes, be they lusers, chanops, ircops, admin, sysops,
      aussies, europeans, americans, humans, bots, reefer addicts, etc.






-- 
----------------------- \  Zippy says:
Doug McLaren,            \  Hiccuping & trembling into the WASTE DUMPS of New
DemoN on IRC              \  Jersey like some drunken CABBAGE PATCH DOLL,
dougmc@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu  \  coughing in line at FIORUCCI'S!!
-------------------------- /
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: jardar@swix.ifi.unit.no (Jardar Eggesboe Abrahamsen)
Subject: Re: Bots, WarBots, Fun?
Organization: Universitaet Trondheim, Norwegen
Distribution: alt.irc
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 17:40:56 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.123357.27764@ugle.unit.no> gardabr@unix1 (Gard Eggesbo Abrahamsen) writes:
>Jardar Eggesboe Abrahamsen (jardar@swix.ifi.unit.no) wrote:
>: I ein artikkel her om dagen skriv herm@acme.etsu.edu:
>: 
>: >Tala Engelska fo"r helvete!
>: >
>: >herm
>: >(sa"g NEJ till obevakade bots)
>: 
>: 
>: NEI TIL SPRAAKLEG IMPERIALISME!
>: 
>: -- 
>: Jardar Eggesboe Abrahamsen         "reduplikasjonsverb (fanst i gotisk,
>: jardar@swix.ifi.unit.no               finst i gresk, restar i norroent)"
>:                                              (Jardar Eggesboe Abrahamsen
>
>We are not talking about imperialism. We are talking about the fact that
>this discussion is world wide and the only common language the readers have
>is English.
>
>Gard

The only common language that the readers have is English because this is
in English. If this discussion were in German, all the readers would have
understood it, and their only common language would probably have been
German. It would of course have been a few other readers, but this only
demonstrates how random it all is. Language is power.

Die einzige gemeinsame Sprache der Leser ist Englisch, weil dies auf
Englisch ist. Wenn diese Diskussion auf Deutsch waere, wuerden alle Leser
sie verstehen, und ihre einzige gemeinsame Sprache wuerde Deutsch sein. Es
wuerden natuerlich einige andere Leser aein, aber dies demonstriert nur,
wie zufaellich alles ist. Sprache heisst Macht.




-- 
Jardar Eggesboe Abrahamsen                "Sprache heisst Macht"
Linguistik-Student                                (R.M. Blakar)
jardar@swix.ifi.unit.no
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: dms50304@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Darkman)
Subject: Re: Bots'n'vi
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 01:44:46 GMT

gardabr@unix1 (Gard Eggesbo Abrahamsen) writes:
[blah deleted]
>to herm's warning. You say Glurg could flood the channel because of the public
>chatting. Well, I have not seen ONE BOT that is fool proof. Not even nickserv.
>If you try to ...
>/set exec_protection off
>/on -notice nickserv /exec -msg nickserv@service.de help ;say $0-
>/msg nickserv@service.de help
>..voila! A flood!
Big deal, you went way out of your way to flood yourself.  meanwhile your
talking bot can flood the whole net.

>And in fact, I _am_ working on a bot now, programmed in C, which will register
>the last message from a nick to compare with the newest, and also check the
>time. If it clearly is a flood, the message will be ignored.
>Well, this test can of course be omitted by changing between several nicks
>and thereby giving each nick enough time, but I will be working on this, too.
>So it's not me not listening. I have just proven that it is impossible to
>do a bot as fool proof as you want it to be in 100% ircii.

Just proves your lack of knowledge of ircII.  Ever think of using $userhost()?
You can check the time difference too.  I'm not a bot advocator, but you
clearly don't know what you are talking about.  I bet you don't know how
to use arrays in ircII either.

-- 
--- Daryn Sharp   Darkman@uiuc.edu
From: s_titz@ira.uka.de (Olaf Titz)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: only allowing 1 irc per login/fake logins
Date: 23 Nov 1992 10:44:36 GMT
Organization: Fachschaft math/inf, Uni Karlsruhe, FRG
NNTP-Posting-Host: irau28.ira.uka.de

In article <1ek31rINN6ah@manuel.anu.edu.au> titus@coombs.anu.edu.au (titus chiu) writes:
>bosman@fwi.uva.nl (Cor Bosman) writes:
>>spidy@acca.nmsu.edu (Da Spidy-Mon) writes:
>>
>>>Making it so that only one IRC session is used by only one LOGIN is still a
>>>good idea. I mean, most of the BOTS that are on the net are dead bots. No
>>
>>No its NOT! Its a very bad idea. It has been said before, but this
>>would mean people will run more and more hacked clients which
>>fake the username.
>...
>indeed fake user@host is becoming a big problem, especially people who
>go and use open servers that are far away (netwise) to fake a login. maybe
>a solution is for ircd to reject hosts that arent running authd and 
>introduce a new line for the ircd conf file say a U:line for specific 
>user@hosts that dont need to be authenticated? any ideas/comment about 
>this suggestion?

Whom would you grant the U:lines? ;-)

But the whole concept is FLAWED. Limiting IRC to sites running authd
would be a quick-hack semisolution to a small part of the problems to
be dealt with, but would piss off a large number of users currently on
IRC, i.e. the ones who use single-user machines, telnet or are on
sites which don't run authd (and can't convince their admin to install
it just for the sake of IRC ;-) or are on exotic machines on which an
authd perhaps will never run (think of IBMainframes...)

The point is the UN*Xocentristic view behind the proposal. A user does
not equal a login anywhere in the world, and to verify a specific user
is mostly technically impossible.

olaf
-- 
| Olaf Titz - comp.sc.student  |   o     | uknf@dkauni2.bitnet | old address |
| univ. of karlsruhe - germany |  _>\ _  | s_titz@ira.uka.de   | is still    |
| +49-721-60439                | (_)<(_) | praetorius@irc      | valid       |
   "Stop talkin' and start chalkin'!" - Eight Ball Deluxe
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: rhm3@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Robert H Morrison)
Subject: Please email the FAQ
Reply-To: rhm3@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Robert H Morrison)
Organization: Columbia University
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 07:13:13 GMT


Hi,

I just heard about IRC and would like beginner's information on how to
use the system.

Thanks.
From: dms50304@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Darkman)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: [*] Irc Statistics (Idle)
Date: 15 Nov 92 21:04:30 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

dougmc@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Doug McLaren) writes:

[blah deleted]
>  2) some people have hacked their client to show a different value than the
>     time since the last keystroke.  I've seen them fixed at zero, fixed
>     at pi seconds, fixed at a very long time (like this one), set to the 
>     '0' time for unix, and random.
[blah deleted]

You don't have to hack the client to adjust your idle time shown.  A simple
/on ctcp can adjust what you see very easily.

-- 
--- Daryn Sharp   Darkman@uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl)
Subject: Re: Bots, WarBots, Fun?
Organization: Department of Astronomy, University of Virginia
Distribution: alt.irc
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 16:26:47 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.123357.27764@ugle.unit.no> gardabr@unix1 (Gard Eggesbo Abrahamsen) writes:

>We are not talking about imperialism. We are talking about the fact that
>this discussion is world wide and the only common language the readers have
>is English.

vanha pervo. we all speak finnish.
From: gardabr@unix1 (Gard Eggesbo Abrahamsen)
Subject: Re: Bots, WarBots, Fun?
Organization: MRIH, More og Romsdal Ingeniorhogskole
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Distribution: alt.irc
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 12:33:57 GMT

Jardar Eggesboe Abrahamsen (jardar@swix.ifi.unit.no) wrote:
: I ein artikkel her om dagen skriv herm@acme.etsu.edu:
: 
: >Tala Engelska fo"r helvete!
: >
: >herm
: >(sa"g NEJ till obevakade bots)
: 
: 
: NEI TIL SPRAAKLEG IMPERIALISME!
: 
: -- 
: Jardar Eggesboe Abrahamsen         "reduplikasjonsverb (fanst i gotisk,
: jardar@swix.ifi.unit.no               finst i gresk, restar i norroent)"
:                                              (Jardar Eggesboe Abrahamsen

We are not talking about imperialism. We are talking about the fact that
this discussion is world wide and the only common language the readers have
is English.

Gard
From: joshua@coombs.anu.edu.au (Joshua Geller)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: Avalog arrested....
Date: 20 Nov 92 19:22:31 GMT
Organization: Australian National University
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.76.2

this is pretty childish, mark. but then, we've come to expect that
from you.

some time ago bill wisner wrote a script that automatically
cancelled all BIFF articles. there was a bit of a furor when 
he tested it, as I recall. 

granted darren should probably ignore your repeated fatuities,
but there are times when a well-directed cancel message can be oh
so satisfying, and I don't suppose someone can be blamed too much
for giving in to temptation once in awhile.

not that I'd ever do such a thing. not traceably, anyway.

josh

Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: mkwg9074@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (M. K. Weaver)
Subject: Re: Call for alt.irc.flame
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 04:32:11 GMT

dougmc@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Doug McLaren) writes:

>I think the time has come (it came a long time ago ...)
>alt.irc.flame!

>-- 
>----------------------- \  Zippy says:
>Doug McLaren,            \  Remember, in 2039, MOUSSE & PASTA will be available
>DemoN on IRC              \  ONLY by prescription!!
>dougmc@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu  \
>-------------------------- /


	Since I tend to slip in a biblical statement here
	and there...I might as well say this...

		AMEN!

	Though there is only one problem. I am a clueless
	flamer. I mean maybe I have flamed people in the
	past...or well, If you don't really realize that
	you have flamed someone...does that make it any
	less of a flame? Guess what...I really am curious
	to an answer to this. Should I post this to alt.flame ?

	bfn,
	Monica

	ps. feel free to e-mail me the answer...but remember
	I am fairly sensitive to temperature changes.
-- 
"When you sit with a nice girl for two hours, you think it is only a minute.
But when you sit on a hot stove for a minute, you think it's two hours.
THAT'S RELATIVITY." (Albert Einstein)
                 "My name is Monica. Got a minute?"
From: titus@coombs.anu.edu.au (titus chiu)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: only allowing 1 irc per login/fake logins
Date: 21 Nov 1992 01:23:07 GMT
Organization: Coombs Computing Unit, Australian National University, Canberra.
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.76.2
Summary: how to stop fake logins.. ideas?
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user on Coombs at ANU. The
              opinions expressed are those of the user and not necessarily
              those of the Australian National University.

bosman@fwi.uva.nl (Cor Bosman) writes:
>spidy@acca.nmsu.edu (Da Spidy-Mon) writes:
>
>>Making it so that only one IRC session is used by only one LOGIN is still a
>>good idea. I mean, most of the BOTS that are on the net are dead bots. No
>
>No its NOT! Its a very bad idea. It has been said before, but this
>would mean people will run more and more hacked clients which
>fake the username. It also means, I could EASILY put up a user@host
>pair for any arbitrary address, and thus succesfully locking that
>person out of irc. Then we'll get the same shit with user/host
>that we now have with nicknames. 

indeed fake user@host is becoming a big problem, especially people who
go and use open servers that are far away (netwise) to fake a login. maybe
a solution is for ircd to reject hosts that arent running authd and 
introduce a new line for the ircd conf file say a U:line for specific 
user@hosts that dont need to be authenticated? any ideas/comment about 
this suggestion?

titus
(Say NO to unattended bots)
--
titus chiu                                   -- email: ---------------------
                                             ---- titus@coombs.anu.edu.au --
  dont drink and drive home                  ---- titus@turing.ORG ---------
  get stoned and fly home.                   -------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: asamonte@hertz.elee.calpoly.edu (Just some loser...)
Subject: Re: Bots, WarBots, Fun?
Organization: Nothing worth mentioning...
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 19:32:50 GMT

avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au (Darren Reed) was telling me...
>asamonte@hertz.elee.calpoly.edu (Just some loser...) writes:
>
>>MsgServ was the original msg bot, and now with the password protected NoteServ
>>people still use the excuse of 'getting messages' for justification for
>>having a bot.  WHen NoteServ already serves that purpose.
>
>>-Alex
>
>NoteServ came before MsgServ which has since taken a dive it seems.

You sure?  I was using msgserv long before I ever knew there was
a noteserv.  And before I used nickserv even.

>NoteServ only lets people who authorize thenselves with NickServ first
>read notes left for them (MsgServ would let anyone with the right nick
>read messages left for it).

Right, that's why NoteServ replaced MsgServ...it was more secure.

-Alex

Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: wlieftin@cs.vu.nl (Liefting W)
Subject: Re: Bots, WarBots, Fun?
Organization: Fac. Wiskunde & Informatica, VU, Amsterdam
Distribution: alt.irc
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 09:15:47 GMT

jardar@swix.ifi.unit.no (Jardar Eggesboe Abrahamsen) writes:

>In article <1992Nov18.123357.27764@ugle.unit.no> gardabr@unix1 (Gard Eggesbo Abrahamsen) writes:
>>Jardar Eggesboe Abrahamsen (jardar@swix.ifi.unit.no) wrote:
>>: I ein artikkel her om dagen skriv herm@acme.etsu.edu:
>>: 
>>: >Tala Engelska fo"r helvete!
>>: >
>>: >herm
>>: >(sa"g NEJ till obevakade bots)
>>: 
>>: 
>>: NEI TIL SPRAAKLEG IMPERIALISME!
>>: 
>>: -- 
>>: Jardar Eggesboe Abrahamsen         "reduplikasjonsverb (fanst i gotisk,
>>: jardar@swix.ifi.unit.no               finst i gresk, restar i norroent)"
>>:                                              (Jardar Eggesboe Abrahamsen
>>
>>We are not talking about imperialism. We are talking about the fact that
>>this discussion is world wide and the only common language the readers have
>>is English.
>>
>>Gard

>The only common language that the readers have is English because this is
>in English. If this discussion were in German, all the readers would have
>understood it, and their only common language would probably have been
>German. It would of course have been a few other readers, but this only
>demonstrates how random it all is. Language is power.

>Die einzige gemeinsame Sprache der Leser ist Englisch, weil dies auf
>Englisch ist. Wenn diese Diskussion auf Deutsch waere, wuerden alle Leser
>sie verstehen, und ihre einzige gemeinsame Sprache wuerde Deutsch sein. Es
>wuerden natuerlich einige andere Leser aein, aber dies demonstriert nur,
>wie zufaellich alles ist. Sprache heisst Macht.

Ok. Good point.
And now move the further discussion to soc.culture.ESPERANTO or 
alt.uu.lang.ESPERANTO.misc please... :-)

Wouter Liefting
(IRC: BackPackr)
wlieftin@cs.vu.nl
From: titus@coombs.anu.edu.au (titus chiu)
Newsgroups: alt.irc
Subject: Re: Bots, WarBots, Fun?
Date: 21 Nov 1992 06:52:50 GMT
Organization: Coombs Computing Unit, Australian National University, Canberra.
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.76.2
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user on Coombs at ANU. The
              opinions expressed are those of the user and not necessarily
              those of the Australian National University.

gardabr@unix1 (Gard Eggesbo Abrahamsen) writes:
>This is the third time I try to post this. For some strange reason, it doesn't
>seem that my entries get through...

just like our point don't seem to be getting through to your brain?

>: didn't you say irc was your home earlier? and when you are not home, you aint
>: there to talk to anyone. This is a perfect example of an absolutely useless
>: bot that the 'programmer' claims to have use for.
>: 
>I don't usually run elm from irc. I don't think it would look much good,
>either. I don't run tin from irc, either. In fact, I have some work to do,
>so sometimes I *HAVE* to leave irc. Also, for some strange reason, the school
>here isn't open 24 hours a day, either.

i think this has already been covered, i dont think many schools switch off
computers at night, as to running other things whilst on irc, that has been
covered as well, but that still doesnt excuse the fact that the bot is 
totally useless (just like another 200 other bots on irc)

>: >Gard
>: 
>: titus
>: (say NO to unattended bots)
>
>Gard

titus
(say NO to unattended bots)
--
titus chiu                                   -- email: ---------------------
                                             ---- titus@coombs.anu.edu.au --
  dont drink and drive home                  ---- titus@turing.ORG ---------
  get stoned and fly home.                   -------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.irc
From: gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl)
Subject: Re: A better idea than most was (Re: People who take VR too seriously...)
Organization: Department of Astronomy, University of Virginia
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 02:15:08 GMT

In article <1992Nov22.013125.128339@zeus.calpoly.edu> asamonte@hertz.elee.calpoly.edu (Just some loser...) writes:

>In my opinion it's just called quality control.  There are already tons
>of operators who are just given ops on a whim so they can me one, and 
>/kill people or whatever.

So why create more? IRC only needs one or two sane operators on-line
to deal with routing problems, so there's no reason why csd needs one
at all. It doesn't matter how high the quality is if it's a useless
job.

Newsgroups: alt.irc