HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Organization: Computing Technology Services, Michigan Technological Univ.
Date: Sunday, 13 Dec 1992 21:55:55 EST
From: <KMING@MTUS5.BITNET>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: test

this is just a test.
From: yding+@pitt.edu (Yijun Ding)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: a fun problem
Date: 16 Dec 92 19:29:57 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1992Dec16.175720.9520@ee.rochester.edu> yao@ee.rochester.edu (Meng Yao) writes:
>I am not kidding, sir. This should be harder than the 24 point game. Up 
>to now, I have received only one reply from someone in Pittsburg and I
>don't know if he has got the correct answer or not, because his mail
>was destroyed for no reason before I could get a chance to read it.

I guess my mail trashed. The answer is bit too complicated to state, but
here goes (just try to be high school kid again):

put 4 balls on each sides:
if( 4 = 4 )  /* all 8 balls are good balls */
  put 3 from remain ones against 3 good balls
  if( 3 = 3) weigh one of remain two with a good one.
  if( xxx > 3 good balls)  /* the bad ball is heavy */
    take 2 from the heavys.
    if( x = x) the remain one is bad, and is heavy
    if( x > x) the heavier is bad
  else if(xxx < 3) ... same
else if(xxxx > oooo)  /* the remain 5 are good, x=heavy o=light */
weigh (xxxoo against the 5 good ball)
if( 5 = 5) /* the question balls are xoo */
  if( xo = 2 good balls) the remain o is bad
  if(xo > 2 good balls) the x is bad
  if(xo < 2...) the o is bad
if( xxxoo > 5 good balls)  /* the bad is in xxx */
  if(x = x)... same as before
if( xxxoo < 5 good balls) /* the bad is in oo */
  ... obvious.

All except one case, we not only can find the bad ball, but tell if 
it is heavy or light.

-- 
//Yijun Ding, Pittsburgh //Go your way, be happy.
From: y70q@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca (LAM)
Subject: Re: Look, what a fantastic way of argueing by steve !
Organization: University of New Brunswick
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 14:41:42 GMT

In article <17DEC199200095886@rosie.uh.edu> eleeaf9@rosie.uh.edu (92F10560) writes:
>Count how many dirty words this steve used in his short response,
 ^^^^^
>count how many good points, good reasoning or facts he introduced,
>count how many HK democracy fighters,TIers present their argument
>in this fantastic way,then you'll know who is rude, who is narrow
>minded, who is unreasonable.

Please count, and tell me exactly how many of them. Thanks.
In your article, you only mentioned Steve, you only mentioned one
person. This person is expressing his viewpoint with some flames.
But it doesn't mean that all HK people are the same. You should
be able to understand this.
There are a lot of discussions with flames. I had also run into
flames, too. But, you know, human can be emotional. If one find
some really uncomfortable articles, one may express one's viewpoint
with anger. Please, if you have an open mind, forgive them.
No people will hold their anger forever, right?
Besides flames, there are people here who are biased. This is worse
than 'flamed' because one can put out the flames, but is hard to
remove the bias. Some people, such as Jian Chen, is biased. It is
strange to hear this dog (note: he called himself a dog, so don't
blame me) not to blame the killing process of the 6-4 event. It is
easy to imagine if your lover is attracted by someone else, you
may thought of killing him. Sure, killing the person may help
you to get back your lover, but what will your lover think? 
Killing someone to suit oneself is selfish. Selfish is
not good, and killing is also bad. Is there any excuse?
From: f0l8973@rigel.tamu.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: a fun problem
Date: 16 Dec 1992 10:08 CST
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: rigel.tamu.edu
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

In article <1992Dec15.235211.7349@ee.rochester.edu>, yao@ee.rochester.edu (Meng Yao) writes...
>Now let's have something more advanced. Given 13 balls that look exactly the
                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>same but one of the 13 balls differs in weight from the others, can you 
>find out this ball by using a balance(tian1 ping2) only three times?
> 
>Meng


You must be kidding!

Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: zeng@ecf.toronto.edu (ZENG Roger Wei Gang)
Subject: GIF POSTING: Another Noriko Sakai (Part 0/1)
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 02:03:09 GMT

Hi all ...

Here's another picture of Noriko Sakai -- the girl in MISS.GIF. Noriko in
this picture is actually look quite unlike the Noriko in MISS.GIF. I like
this a lot because she, in this picture, looks very much alike a girl in my
high school class and was she ever pretty!

Anyway, enjoy the pic!

My rating for this pose of Noriko: 8.5 out of 10

-- 
	N E W   Y E A R 		Roger Zeng
      G R E E T I N G S !		Engeering Science 9T5
					University of Toronto
					e-mail: zeng@ecf.toronto.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi)
Subject: Re: DATA: largest world economies
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Lowell Computer Science
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 22:11:25 GMT

In article <1992Dec20.211312.334@zip.eecs.umich.edu> cyc@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Yi-Chieh Chang) writes:
>>Not so simple. I thought the CCP have, for the longest time, maintained
>>that they simply haven't bothered to "conquer" Taiwan, but in their mind,
>>the whole nation is theirs after they took over the capitol; and "nation"
>>does include Taiwan.
>
>Are you implying that if one beat its opponent in bussiness can take his
>wife, children, houses, etc ?
>
>CCP has already got all he could and should get after beaten KMT at 1949 
>and whatever left belongs to ROC, or Taiwan.
analogy is for the purpose of illustrating or dramatizing the point people want to 
make. A lot of "analogies" made in this net are normally further complicate
the oringinal points people wantes to make and need further explanation.



Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: xiaohan@euler.Berkeley.EDU (Xiaohan Yun)
Subject: Re: puzzle?
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 00:21:00 GMT

In article <BzDH6E.6K8@news.iastate.edu> zzuo@iastate.edu (Zhiqi Zuo) writes:
>> good point! the original anwser as i heard of is ' the cow's tail
>>points to the groud', but i guess your reasoning maybe more fun than
>>the original one. it wasn't a serious question anyway, although it
>>looks like one.
>>
>>have fun!
>>
>
>Strictly speaking, my answer of "ANY DIRECTION", though not as funny, 
>is also a correct one.
>
>"It is hitting the South Wall!" might not be an answer, but it is not
>wrong either.
>
>:-O

 absolutly. we can just imaging as wild as we can on this one, i guess.
it meant to be this way after all.

Xiaohan 
:-)

Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.hongkong
From: joe@athena.mit.edu (Joseph C Wang)
Subject: Re: DATA: largest world economies
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 02:43:53 GMT

In article <1992Dec9.220621.7872@cbnews.cb.att.com> liaohen@cbnews.cb.att.com (Heng-Hsin Liao) writes:
>No, it's not a joke. Taiwanese is not Chinese. (Strictly, if you will,)
>Chinese only associates with China. Taiwan is not part of China.
>Therefore Taiwanese is NOT Chinese.

If *you* don't think of yourself as Chinese, then I won't force you to
do so.  On the other hand, there are a lot of people living on Taiwan
who think of themselves as Taiwan Chinese.  Surely they have the right
to do so.
From: renjian@cougar.rice.edu (Renjian Lu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: air ticket for sale, Houston-L.A., 12/24/92, $90
Date: 20 Dec 92 19:42:00 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Civil Engineering Department - Rice University

departure: 12/24/92, 12:20p, Houston intercontinental airport
arrival:   Los Angeles
expire:    6/93
sale:      $90.00
call:      (713)523-0747, leave message
E-mail:    renjian@lynx.rice.edu
From: rap@news (Ross Paterson)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: How Turkic are the "Uygurs" (Was Re: Russian in Xinjiang)
Date: 16 Dec 1992 12:34:49 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Computing, Imperial College, University of London, UK.
Distribution: na
Reply-To: rap@doc.ic.ac.uk
NNTP-Posting-Host: peaberry.doc.ic.ac.uk

From article <92Dec15.145021est.56@orasis.vis.toronto.edu>, by liuyh@vis.toronto.edu (Yuanhui Liu):
| In article <1ghqusINNlin@frigate.doc.ic.ac.uk> rap@doc.ic.ac.uk writes:
|>The Tu"rk ruled over the other tribes, including the Uighur.  The Tang
|>took advantage of a revolt by the subject tribes (especially the Uighur)
|>to attack and defeat the Tu"rk, and the Uighur took over the eastern
|>Turkish empire.
|
| Tang attacked East TuJie because it kept on threaten Tang's borders,
| and Li ShiMin finally decided if he ever going to have peace on the
| northern borders is that have a total war against East TuJie and wipe
| it out(the best defense is a good offense). and naturally, all East TuJie's
| subjects got loose and grab whatever they can at the same time made
| peace with Tang so that their new possessions are confirmed by Tang
| and therefore others cannot take it away from them without looking like
| an agressor & trouble maker in the region, and fight an alliance
| headed by Tang's army.    

I think both accounts are valid views of the same events from different
viewpoints.  But the revolt did happen before the successful Tang attack.
Nothing wrong with choosing the best moment for an attack you regard as
necessary.

|>I was thinking of the battle of Atlach (on the Talas river in Sogdiana,
|>modern Kirghizia) in 751.
|
| okay, i was not aware of that, that was only couple of years before
| An-shi revolt.  if the civil war did not occur, Tang certainly
| had the power & resource to hold on to its central asia possessions
| even with most campaigns against its enemies ended up in defeat.  

This is a matter of dispute, like all "what if" questions.  There were
constant revolts, and it is doubtful whether the Tang had the same sort of
control there that that had in Annam, say.  The army had to operate a long
way from their supply areas in Gansu -- they were just over-stretched.
I forget exactly how many pounds of grain were consumed in getting one
pound to the soldiers out there -- was it 15?  Some people regard the
Tang defeat at the hands of the Arabs at Atlach as one of the turning
points of history, because it placed extra strain on a system that
was only just working, and tipped the scales.  But as you point out,
the revolt a few years later made the whole question hypothetical.
(Of course if the Tang had never captured the western regions, maybe
they wouldn't have had a Sogdian general to rebel -- same problem in
the Roman and Byzantine empires.)

Ross
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Wednesday, 16 Dec 1992 17:57:31 CST
From: <U21885@uicvm.uic.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Gun Shot


According to The World Journal (Chinese Newspaper) , Wednesday , Dec.16,

1992 :
   On Dec 15,1992 at the state of Massachusetts,
   A hornor student from China shot two to dead and the other four
wounded , by using his semi-auto rifle which was just bought at the
same day. After the incident , he called the police department to
declare the incident.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: fengxi@prancer.eche.ualberta.ca (Fengxi Zhou)
Subject: Re: NEWS: Survey Article of Chinese Economy
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 16:53:41 GMT

cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi) writes:
: >
: I remembered vaguely read from somewhere that U.S. screte service are capable 
: monitor electronic
: signals all over the world, all of them! They scan through all man-sent
: e-signals with super computer, looking for key words,( assumeing missles,
:
US intelligence community is quite complicated and therefore easy to cause
confusion. I am no expert on this matter but i would like to share what i
know. Please feel free to add and correct the following post:

Secrete service: responsible for the safety of the president and high
officials of the cabinet.
FBI: any federal crime, including counter espionage (sp?)
CIA: foreign information gathering. NOT allowed to operate on US soil.
DIA: military intelligence.
NSA: signal info gathering. infact, this is the one Mr. Shi was talking about.
NSC: coordinator of intelligence community. Does it have its own field
	 operatives? I tend to think not.

The difference btw CIA and NSA is CIA is responsible for human intelligence
and NSA is responsible for signal intelligence. All these are from publically
available sources.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.hongkong
From: liuyh@vis.toronto.edu (Yuanhui Liu)
Subject: Re: Is Taiwanese CHinese?
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
Distribution: na  
Date: 17 Dec 92 15:45:40 GMT

In article <BzE3BC.FG7@ecf.toronto.edu> huangs@ecf.toronto.edu (HUANG SUNG CHING) writes:
>In article <1992Dec16.212856.17886@zip.eecs.umich.edu> cyc@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Yi-Chieh Chang) writes:
>>>>Who posted the original article?  This is the most stupid thread I have ever
>>>>see in USENET.  It is like asking "IS WHITE AMERICAN BRITISH"? or "IS WHITE
>>>>CANADIAN BRITISH"?
>>>>
>>>>How stupid.  Another bitching thread from the pro-CCPers, I guess...
>>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>
>>>if so why are all the guys from Taiwan arguing among each other?
>>>are the "yes" side CCP/KMT spies?  ;->  
>>>
>>
>>That's because a small group of people in Taiwan who are holding most of
>>the power don't want to be Taiwanese. Since they controled all of the mass
>>medias, so they could constantly brainwash Taiwanese that they are Chinese.
>>Of cause, some people buy it, but any body with minimal independent thought
>>will laugh at it.
>
>
>      There are also a number of people from Mainland China in this group of
>discussion.  Some of them are evidently pro-CCP from their arguments and 
>comments.  I have a feeling that it must be a CCP plot to have them infiltrate
>here and fuel disharmony and discontent among people from Taiwan by bring about
>issues that does not concern them, i.e. Independence.  It is for us to decide, 
>not them.
>
hahh, how brilliant, all the guys from Taiwan fell for it!  ;->  I wonder
James Bond and the MI6 can ever come up with the same smart plots as
these "pro-CCP spies".  Geeez.
From: yao@ee.rochester.edu (Meng Yao)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Answer to fun problem No.2 and related matters
Date: 17 Dec 92 17:58:58 GMT
Organization: Univ of Rochester, College of Engineering and Applied Science

First, let's talk about the answer of this problem. I am not including the 
original problem here, interested readers can find it in related postings
in this net.
Before the host opens one door for you, the probabilities of the two cases
i.e., choose a car and choose a goat are 1/3 and 2/3 respectively. Let's
discuss the two cases separately. Say you choose a car (1/3 probability),
after the host opens one door with a goat behind it, the other door must
have a goat behind it too. So, if you stick to your original choice, you
will get the car, and if you switch you will get the goat. The chance of
getting the car by sticking to original choice will be 1/3. Say you choose
a goat (2/3 probability), after the host opens one door with a goat behind
it, the other door must have the car behind it. So, if you stick to your
original choice, you will get the goat, and if you switch you will get the
car. The chance of getting the car by switching is 2/3. The above is what's 
carried in Reader's Digest(Chinese). The following is my personal opinion,
I did not get the correct answer at my first try, though.
Let's put it in mathematical form: 
Case1: sticking to original choice. Probability of getting the car:
	1/3*1 + 2/3*0 = 1/3
Case2: swiching to another door. Probability of getting the car:
	1/3*0 + 2/3*1 = 2/3

Now, I know I am faced with the question of why the decison that concludes 
it does not matter switching or not is wrong.
When people say switching and not switching have equal opportunity of winning
the car, they are assuming these doors (door No.1 and door No.2, for example)
are in equal status. But they are not. When you choose door No.1, the host
can never open this door, but door No.2 has run the "risk" of being opened
and survived. You can think this way, when the host opens one door, there is
a 50% chance that he will choose door No.2, but he did not choose this one
and opened door No.3. This gives door No.2 a bias, so door No.1 and door No.2
are no longer in equal status, you can't say it's a 50% chance.

Let's look at it another way: If the host opens one door without asking your
choice and he opens door No.3, then door No.1 and door No.2 are in equal
status, this will be a 50% chance.

Somebody said this is a conditional probability problem, I agree and I think
it can be solved with theories of conditional probability.

Secondly, let's talk about if this kind of games should or should not be
posted here. This is less related to culture, but I think it's better than
politics and personal attack. At least, people had fun with the games.
I would like to suggest that everybody post something interesting, like
jokes, amusing personal experience, anything you would like to share with
other people. This will make soc.culture.china more cultural instead of
more political.

Meng
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.hongkong,soc.culture.taiwan,talk.politics.china
From: fun@ok.NoSubdomain.NoDomain
Subject: Re: About the pretty girl
Organization: Queen's University, Kingston
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 01:04:24 GMT

In article <yzhou.724109113@void>, yzhou@void.ncsa.uiuc.edu (Joe Y. Zhou) writes:

|>        You are kidding?  Obviously, you haven't seen many beautiful female.:-)
|>        On a scale of 10, 6 will be the highest she could get from me.-------^
|> 
|>        joe

-- 


Would you like to post some of them on a scale better than this one?                  
I believe you have many.



=============================================================================
From: ma@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: Is Chairman Mao God?
Date: 17 Dec 92 09:36:43 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

In article <1992Dec16.193303.4159@vax.cns.muskingum.edu>, jfeng@vax.cns.muskingum.edu writes:
> 
>    ** That is a very interesting comparison though, it does not make Chairman
> Mao God at all. Neither Mao's birthdate (quite a coincidence) or his legacy
> (good or bad?) makes him God.  It is our stupidity and blind worship that
                                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This is true for any worship.

> created the Monster who nearly destroyed our nation. That some people are now
> beginning to worship Mao again simply reaffirms nothing but their stupidity and
> ignorance. Haven't we had enough miseries under Mao?  Or are just cherishing
> the memory of those good old days?
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: lix@crsa.bu.edu (Xiaowen Li)
Subject: Re: How do you say "Will you marry me" in Chinese?
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 03:52:35 GMT

X Xu wrote:
>Old guys sing "Guan1 Guan1 Ju1 Jiu1".
>Thanks to Mr. Xiangfei Wang who posted it.

Indeed, my thanks to Xiaofei also.

>Time is changing.
>If you sing that, few girls know what you mean.

Not necessarily. Xiao Deng has a song obviously after the one of what
XiaoFei posted, I like it, very beautiful. Sanyee also heard some songs
after the "Mountain Ghost". The problem is someones are needed to dig
these treasures out and make them popular.

>It may cause you to pay tuition.
>And Lix surly is happy to have more students.

No worry, by that young netter's suggestion, I have retired:-)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: "micky wong" <micky.wong@canrem.com>
Subject: working for a new relatio
Reply-To: "micky wong" <micky.wong@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: soc
Date: 12 Dec 92 19:53:46 EST

In Article: <1992Dec11.160412.21954@cs.mcgill.ca>
   Subject: Working for a new relationship between Taiwan and China
      From: haiying@cs.mcgill.ca (Haiying ZHANG) writes:


>     Agreed, whole heartedly. The mutual isolation resulted from the old
>idiological battle has made us to some extend virtual foreigners towards
>each other. Let us keep up the communication and interaction. After
>all, we do have a strong common heritage. Understanding among us should
>not be that difficult. Back to the start of the original thread, I must
>say that I found the news of being able to watch CCTV in Taiwan very
>amazing. I was surprised by the fact that this is apparently at least
>Muo4 (silent) Xu3 (allowed) by the KMT/Taiwan government.

>   With the growth rate of economy on the mainland, I am optimistic that
>the day that majority of us finally bury away all the wreckage of old
>idiological battles/skirmishes, accept each other as equal friend and
>country(wo)man is not too far away.

Clap... Clap....  fully agree your above view...

IMHO, In recent years, The progress of the KMT/Taiwan government in it's
attitude towards freedom of press and freedom of expression was even more
significant than Taiwan's economical performance.

The CCP/Chineese government need to learn from the KMT/Taiwan government
if the CG leaders has sincere intention to achieve China's Unity based
on mutual respect and equality.

The recent good opportunity of demonstrating such sincerity could be in
CG's handling of Patten's proposal. It is unfortunate that we have yet
to see any improvement in CG's attitude towards the HongKong people.

Without the modernization of CG's behavior, how to sustain it's recent
economic growth, and how to transform these growth into real tangible
benefits for the majority of the Chinese mass could became a serious
question.
---
 MegaMail 2.1 #0:
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: hongma@cs.sfu.ca (Hong Ma)
Subject: Test 
Organization: CSS, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Distribution: World
Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1992 00:23:38 GMT

Test!
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: yao@ee.rochester.edu (Meng Yao)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: fun problem No.2
Date: 17 Dec 92 22:49:46 GMT
Organization: Univ of Rochester, College of Engineering and Applied Science

In article <892@blue.cis.pitt.edu> yding+@pitt.edu (Yijun Ding) writes:
>Let A1 A2 A3 denote the car is in door 1 2 3 respectively.
>P(A2) = P(A3) = 1/3.
>
>P(A2 | not A3) = P(A2 but not A3) / P(not A3) 
>               = (car in door 2 but not 3)/(car not in 3)
>               = (1/3)/(2/3) = 1/2
>
>The human factor is not considered though ;-)
>
>-- 
>//Yijun Ding, Pittsburgh //Go your way, be happy.

You lost some information, so you get a smaller chance. My conditional
probability goes like this:

P(A2 | open 3 between 2 and 3)=P(A2, open 3 between 2 and 3)/P(open 3 between 2 and 3);

here, we have a stronger condition, it not only says door 3 has a goat behind it
(otherwise it would not have been opened), but also 3 is chosen instead of 2.

Numerator: A2 means car in door 2, so it can not be opened, so door 3 has to be
opened. Thus the event 'open 3 between 2 and 3' is a subset of the event 'A2'.
So, P(A2, open 3 between 2 and 3)=P(A2)=1/3

Denominator:    case 1. car in door 1:
			P=(1/3)*(1/2)    (the 1/2 comes from choose 3 between 2 and 3,
					which are both goats in this case)
		case 2. car not in door 1:
			P=(2/3)*(1/2)    (1/2 is the chance that car is in door 2, so open 3)
	Thus P(open 3 between 2 and 3)=1/6 + 1/3=1/2
Or you can simply say, since 2 and 3 are in equal status, the chance of open 3 is 1/2

Therefore, P(A2 | open 3 between 2 and 3)=(1/3)/(1/2)=2/3

Meng