HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: pt@geovision.gvc.com (Paul Tomblin)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.kibology,alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: Total erasure of hard drive data??
Date: 29 Sep 92 01:13:51 GMT
Reply-To: pt@geovision.gvc.com
Organization: Not officially GeoVision Systems Inc., Ottawa, Ontario

kibo@world.std.com (James "Kibo" Parry) writes:
>In article <DOUGM.92Sep27224729@bradbury.cns.caltech.edu> dougm@cns.caltech.edu (Doug McNaught) writes:
>>                       I just try to remember that you run into bozos
>>in all walks of life, and most of them are nice folks. 

>I hereby nominate Mr. McNaught for the 1992 Kibo Prize, awarded annually

KIBO GREPS FOR "BOZO" - Film at 11.

(Or are you going to claim that he reads alt.folklore.computers?  No way -
he's one of those artsy-types: "typeface designer" indeed!)

-- 
Paul Tomblin, pt@geovision.gvc.com
(This is not an official opinion/statement of GeoVision Systems Inc.)
"Ok dear, want me to call the bike shop and see if they'll sponsor your
mid-life crisis?" "Yeah.  Ask them if they'll upgrade my shifters, too"
Xref: sparky alt.religion.computers:815 comp.human-factors:2378 comp.windows.misc:1535 comp.windows.news:717
From: mathew@mantis.co.uk (mathew)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers,comp.human-factors,comp.windows.misc,comp.windows.news
Subject: Re: GUIs Considered Harmful
Keywords: Mac, Window, Throw
Date: 23 Sep 92 12:03:24 GMT
Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK.

uqak945@ucl.ac.uk (Allan Dyer) writes:
> I disagree with the poster who said PostScript files are not editable. They
> contain only ASCII characters, and I have edited them, and advised users to
> edit them (the application liked a pale grey for all it's output - it was
> easy to find the offending command and change it, far easier than getting the
> software producer to change it).

OK.  I'll send you a document printed to a Postscript file.  You then
rearrange the paragraphs slightly, change the paper size, and correct the
spellings.  Should only take a few minutes, right?


mathew
Xref: sparky alt.religion.computers:798 comp.human-factors:2324 comp.windows.misc:1503 comp.windows.news:703
From: djohnson@cs.ucsd.edu (Darin Johnson)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers,comp.human-factors,comp.windows.misc,comp.windows.news
Subject: Re: GUIs Considered Harmful
Keywords: Mac, Window, Throw
Date: 26 Sep 92 19:30:02 GMT
Followup-To: alt.religion.computers
Organization: =CSE Dept., U.C. San Diego

>OK.  I'll send you a document printed to a Postscript file.  You then
>rearrange the paragraphs slightly, change the paper size, and correct the
>spellings.  Should only take a few minutes, right?

Hmm, much quicker just to send it back to the author :-)

Seriously though, is it any simpler if you sent me something in XYZ
format for machine W, assuming I have neither?  If I expect the person
on the other end of the line to be able to edit the contents, I would
have sent something in a suitable format.  Emacs sure as heck lets me
edit postscript a lot easier than some wacky framemaker/word/foo
format.  I can even change spellings some, resize the paper (fonts may
squish a bit though).
-- 
Darin Johnson
djohnson@ucsd.edu
    "Only Nixon could go to China"  -- Vulcan proverb
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers,comp.human-factors,comp.windows.misc,comp.windows.news
From: aldavi01@rigel.spd.louisville.edu (Arlie Davis)
Subject: Re: GUIs Considered Harmful
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 16:16:30 GMT
Organization: University of Louisville
Keywords: Mac, Window, Throw

In <1992Sep30.183814.7914@walter.cray.com> jcarroll@ferris.cray.com (Jeff Carroll) writes:

> In article <DcZJRB15w165w@mantis.co.uk>, mathew@mantis.co.uk (mathew) writes:
> > uqak945@ucl.ac.uk (Allan Dyer) writes:
> > > I disagree with the poster who said PostScript files are not editable. They
> > > contain only ASCII characters, and I have edited them, and advised users to
> > > edit them (the application liked a pale grey for all it's output - it was
> > > easy to find the offending command and change it, far easier than getting the
> > > software producer to change it).
> > 
> > OK.  I'll send you a document printed to a Postscript file.  You then
> > rearrange the paragraphs slightly, change the paper size, and correct the
> > spellings.  Should only take a few minutes, right?

> Don't be silly. PostScript files are *source code*. Of course you can edit
> them.

Yes, but the vast majority of PostScript files are generated by other
programs, which work from different source.

It's like cfront, the C++-to-C translator.  Run a medium-sized C++ program
through cfront, and then look at the C code that it generates.  Yeah, it's
valid C (it better be! :), but it's hell to read or alter in a useful way.

-- 
lrwx------   1 aldavi01 emacsstu       9 Jun  6 12:43 .signature -> /dev/null
Xref: sparky alt.religion.computers:804 comp.human-factors:2352 comp.windows.misc:1520 comp.windows.news:710
From: jcarroll@ferris.cray.com (Jeff Carroll)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers,comp.human-factors,comp.windows.misc,comp.windows.news
Subject: Re: GUIs Considered Harmful
Keywords: Mac, Window, Throw
Date: 30 Sep 92 23:38:13 GMT
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Originator: jcarroll@ferris


In article <DcZJRB15w165w@mantis.co.uk>, mathew@mantis.co.uk (mathew) writes:
> uqak945@ucl.ac.uk (Allan Dyer) writes:
> > I disagree with the poster who said PostScript files are not editable. They
> > contain only ASCII characters, and I have edited them, and advised users to
> > edit them (the application liked a pale grey for all it's output - it was
> > easy to find the offending command and change it, far easier than getting the
> > software producer to change it).
> 
> OK.  I'll send you a document printed to a Postscript file.  You then
> rearrange the paragraphs slightly, change the paper size, and correct the
> spellings.  Should only take a few minutes, right?

Don't be silly. PostScript files are *source code*. Of course you can edit
them.

Granted, there's a difference between editing a program which happens to
cause the printing of a document (all printing in PostScript, remember,
is a side effect), and editing the document itself.

Jeff Carroll
carroll@herndon.cray.com
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers
From: Peter.Gorny@arbi.informatik.uni-oldenburg.de (Peter Gorny)
Subject: Re: Edit PSFile (Was (hopefully!!): GUIs Considered Harmful)
Organization: University of Oldenburg, Germany
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 22:26:20 GMT
Keywords: Mac, Window, Throw

djohnson@cs.ucsd.edu (Darin Johnson) writes:
>>OK.  I'll send you a document printed to a Postscript file.  You then
>>rearrange the paragraphs slightly, change the paper size, and correct the
>>spellings.  Should only take a few minutes, right?
>Hmm, much quicker just to send it back to the author :-)

Darin and all the others discussing PSfile editing problems:


PLEEEAASE change the subject line in the header.....

To continue this discussion under the topic GUI considered harmful is close
to mental harrassment!!!!

Peter Gorny
-- 
.     ________________________________________________________
      Snail-Mail:    P.O.Box 2503 - D-2900 Oldenburg - Germany 
      Voice:            +49-441-798-2901 or -4521 (Fax: -2155)
      E-Mail:     Peter.Gorny@arbi.Informatik.Uni-Oldenburg.DE 
      ________________________________________________________

Xref: sparky alt.religion.computers:800 comp.human-factors:2332 comp.windows.x:17197
From: donn@carson.u.washington.edu (Donn Cave)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers,comp.human-factors,comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: GUIs Considered Harmful
Keywords: Mac, Window, Throw
Date: 28 Sep 92 17:19:44 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Sep28.171944.19618
Organization: University of Washington

mike@isgtec.com (Mike Sellers) writes:

|twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
|%! mouse@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu (der Mouse) writes:
|%! > djohnson@cs.ucsd.edu (Darin Johnson) writes:
|%! >> (A fancy version would just check the first two characters first, and
|%! >> if not postcript, run it through a text to postscript filter.)
|%! >
|%! >The first two characters??  Whatever your chosen "first two characters"
|%! >are, there are plenty of text files that begin with them, and
|%! >PostScript programs that begin with other characters.
|%! 
|%! Too bad for the hapless user, then.  

| I sure hope you never get within striking distance of a user interface.
| This sort of attitude towards users' interactions with computers is 
| precisely why so many programs are unusable.  A little more intelligence
| in our systems (hard work though it is to put in), and a lot less of this 
| kind of punitive attitude, will go a long way toward making better systems.

Of the two issues here - non-PostScript files with the magic number, and
PostScript files without it - the latter is not a user interface issue, but
a programming convention.  If der Mouse gets within striking distance of a
programmer who causes PostScript files to be produced without the "%!" magic
number, then I hope his bite injects a little sense into that person.

As for whether it's a good convention, perhaps it's debatable, but I don't
see you proposing an alternative.  It's one thing to propose a little more
intelligence in our systems, but what about a little more intelligence in
our postings, rather than more-user-friendly-than-thou flames?

	Donn Cave, University Computing Services, University of Washington
	donn@cac.washington.edu
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers
From: dwdyer@polari.online.com
Subject: Re: Lee DeForest and MS-DOS
Organization: Seattle Online Public Access Unix.  (206) 328-4944 (all lines telebit-equipped)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 02:09:31 GMT

malc@pyramid.unr.edu (Malcolm L. Carlock) writes:

[stuff I completely agree with deleted nevertheless...]

>I read a while back where the most popular PC in Germany was the Amiga.
>At least one user community insisted on a reasonable set of minimal
>features (multitasking and reasonable graphics right from the start.)
>Sigh.  Maybe a good portion of USAns are sheeplike yahoos after all...

>"A memory management program for a single-tasking, non-virtual memory OS?
> This is a joke, right?"

In my estimation, the greatest problem with the US business computing folks
is that they listened too hard when the US Computing Media (way back when)
yelled, "Oh Shit!  The Apple II and the IBM PC don't run the same software!
What -WILL- we do??"  Of course, this was in the days when 640K RAM
seemed like more than even God could want.  The second greatest problem
was that IBM figured "Hell, we're making money, why bother to update the
software?  Give 'em a few more slots, toss in a 10Megger (Who could use
all that space??) and charge an arm and a leg.  If they want "Advanced
Technology", well, give them a '286.  Don't bother really updating the
software, business users are dolts.  Eight character filenames are all they
can handle anyway.  People like well-defined boundaries.  They don't want 
power, they want a box to sit in the corner and look technological."

IBM doesn't care about PC's.  It's an ego trip for them.  Microsoft is now
convincing people that the essence of the PC is the OS, and they have been
the OS for so long, that they have more of a hold on the user than IBM does.
NOBODY buys IBM.  Show me ONE IBM buyer that is an individual, and I'll show
you someone who needs to be slapped.

BTW -- I am a happy Amiga owner.  I just stepped in to bash IBM a bit.  
But not as an Amiga owner.  For three years I programmed on IBM machines,
was a IBM PC Network (yes, the hardware and all) administrator, and I
learned to loathe the company, their hardware, and most of all, their
prices.
-- 
                 Wayne Dyer --- dwdyer@polari.online.com  
  "I mistrust all systematizers and I avoid them. The will to a system
      is a lack of integrity."  -Nietzsche, _Twilight of the Idols_ 
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers,comp.human-factors,comp.windows.misc,comp.windows.news
From: daniel@csgi63.dcs.leeds.ac.uk (D N Crow)
Subject: Re: GUIs Considered Harmful
Organization: School of Computer Studies, University of Leeds
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 14:26:36 GMT
X-Posted-From: csgi63.leeds.ac.uk
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <1992Sep30.183814.7914@walter.cray.com>, jcarroll@ferris.cray.com (Jeff Carroll) writes:
> > 
> > OK.  I'll send you a document printed to a Postscript file.  You then
> > rearrange the paragraphs slightly, change the paper size, and correct the
> > spellings.  Should only take a few minutes, right?
> 
> Don't be silly. PostScript files are *source code*. Of course you can edit
> them.
> 
> Granted, there's a difference between editing a program which happens to
> cause the printing of a document (all printing in PostScript, remember,
> is a side effect), and editing the document itself.
> 
> Jeff Carroll
> carroll@herndon.cray.com

Hmmm... interesting. Sure PostScript is source code for a printer driver that
understands the PostScript language. On the other hand I have a DTP system
that, in effect, converts my WYSIWIG language source code into PostScript
object code. There ultimately is no difference between source and object code
on a computer system: they are simply translations of one another.

Another example: I know of a person who can read and edit 8088 object code
(not assembler, the actual machine instructions). I'm not sure that it follows
that because my friend can do it, we should abandon high level languages and
force everyone to speak in binary digits.

The argument that postScript is source code seems spurious to me: of course
we can edit it, just as on most machines you can edit object code. The real
question is whether doing that is an appropriate mechanism for users who
wish to acheive certain goals (like altering a document). I would argue that
for all but a tiny percentage of any realistic user base, editing PostScript
is not a realistic option.

However, PostScript does have the advantage of being standard. Certainly in the
sense that many document preparation systems available today will output it.
If there were a set of filters which allowed such applications to read
PostScript and reconstruct an editable document in their internal format,
it would be a really useful document transfer protocol. Unfortunately, the
PostScript language is so rich and powerful, that this reverse translation
is usually difficult to say the least...

-- 
Dan Crow
daniel@scs.leeds.ac.uk
Xref: sparky alt.religion.sabaean:20 alt.pagan:10150 alt.magick:4915 alt.astrology:1888
From: bes@ddsw1.mcs.com (Bes)
Subject: Zodiac
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 11:32:58 GMT
Organization: ddsw1.MCS.COM Contributor, Chicago IL
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3


It seems that according to ancient Sumerian/Babylonian texts there may have
been yet another zodiacal pattern in the sky on the ecliptical houses.

"After the loss of Apsu, and the terrible was that the new gods Anu, Enlil
and Enki had waged and won, Tiamat nostalgically was moved to create new
creatures, which she did fashion in the heavens.

Of these there were:

1) MUSHMAHHU     a fanged, poisoned filled serpents;

2) USHUM-GALLU   a ferocious leonine serpentine dragon

3) BASHMU        horned vipers

4) MUSH HUSH SHU or angry dragons

5) LAHAMU        fifty sphinx-like hairy creatures, the like seen as
                 supports for doorways in Assyrio/Babylonian palaces.
6) PIRIG GALLU   a great lion

7) UR IDIM MA    a mad dog

8) GIRTAB LULU   a scorpion man

9) UME DABRUTI   fierce storm demons

10) KUL LULU     a merman or man half part fish (of a carp)

11) KUSARIKKU    a great water bison


Then Tiamat is moved to yet one more creation: A consort whom she will name
KINGU and empower him with the tablets of destiny whom will also rule over
the eleven types of creations above.

BES

Xref: sparky alt.religion.sabaean:27 alt.pagan:10336 alt.magick:4984 alt.astrology:1920
From: lilleyc@cs.man.ac.uk (Chris Lilley)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.sabaean,alt.pagan,alt.magick,alt.astrology
Subject: Re: HALLOW'EEN
Date: 30 Sep 92 21:36:49 GMT
Followup-To: alt.religion.sabaean
Organization: Dept Computer Science, University of Manchester, U.K.

In article <BvEE25.6J8@ddsw1.mcs.com> eshin@ddsw1.mcs.com (Eshin-Fun) writes:

>>>lilleyc@cs.man.ac.uk (Chris Lilley) writes in his follow up:

>>>responses have been distributed to the following newsgroups
>      alt.sabean<<<

> [35 lines of pure vitriol removes to save bandwidth, and mostly
because it was content free]

Well that seems to have pushed *your* button!! ;-)

OK so I mis-spelled sabaean. Well wow. That hardly merits the
vituperific outpost you came out with. My news poster failed to detect
a mis-spelled followup line. 

If you just want to bombard me with personal abuse, stick to email:
lilley@cgu.mcc.ac.uk

I notice that you did not respond to any of my criticisms, or indeed
to anyone elses either. If you have anything sensible to say, say it;
else, shut up.

I wish I still had Eshin-Funs post from several months back,
lambasting a.p for having too much flamage and too little academic
discussion. 

Hypocrite.

>You unmitigated miniscule insect why don't you restrict your asshole tactics
>to your fellow self righteous christian friends instead of polluting the net
>with audacious Machiavellian despotism!!!

  <snort chuckle>

Now say something sensible or go away.

--
Chris Lilley
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technical Author, ITTI Computer Graphics and Visualisation Training Project
Computer Graphics Unit, Manchester Computing Centre, Manchester, UK
Internet:   lilley@cgu.mcc.ac.uk        Janet:   lilley@uk.ac.mcc.cgu
Voice:      +44 (0)61 275 6095          Fax:     +44 (0)61 275 6040
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.religion.sabaean
From: eshin@ddsw1.mcs.com (Eshin-Fun)
Subject: Re: new to this group
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 15:11:11 GMT
Organization: ddsw1.MCS.COM Contributor, Chicago IL
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

>>rcmolden@parmesan.cs.wisc.edu (Robertc. Moldenhauer) writes:
: 
: No, it's another one of those "weird 'new age' groups" that seem to exist
: in the dark netherworld of alt.  The real Sabaeaans like Bilqis their best
: known queen and her lover Solomon are long dead.  The alt groups were created
: to have fun, not to get serious.  Sci.archaeology or Soc.culture.arabic would
: be the place to go if you want to talk about the early inhabitants of the 
: Arabian penisula.<<

According to Flavius Josephus the Jewish historian in his work "Antiquities
of the Jews" states that her name was Nicaule. He further states that:
(Book viii, chap vi,5) "There was then a woman queen of Egypt and Ethiopia;
she was inquisitive into philosophy, and one that on other accounts also was
to be admired."

According to the controversial egyptologist Immanuel Velikovsky this self
same queen is in reality Hapshepsut the famous queen of the seventeenth
dynasty, of Egypt (wife to Tutmose).

Even though Emile Habashi al-Ashqar wrote to his historical novel "Bilquis,
Queen of the Yaman (3 vol,beirut 1957), you should know that in all the
inscriptions and monuments of the Sabaean epoch which they carried away to
Europe there has been found >NO< trace of the name of the queen Bilquis whom
some of the historians have sought to place among the kings of the first
period.
The name Bilquis has been found among the kings of the second period which
is the Himyaritic era, begining in 115 B.C. and certainly she is not
`Solomon's queen; in fact she never knew Solomon nor is there any connection
between them whatsoever.

Now, beside your obvious elemental sunday school learning where did you get
such a preposterous notion that Sabaeans no longer exist??
How did you deduce that the net is a game program?? If that's your approach
to the net you insult a great deal of people that definately do not only
>not< agree with you but find you ridiculously offensive!

If your extent of reference and research is limited to a biblical
interpretation then why don't you limit your commentary to
alt.religion.christian or some such thread where their limit of
understanding does not go beyond their unshakeable prejudices.

Eshin-Fun

Newsgroups: alt.religion.sabaean,alt.pagan,alt.magick,alt.astrology
From: eshin@ddsw1.mcs.com (Eshin-Fun)
Subject: Re: Eshun-Fun: Relax
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 21:12:21 GMT
Organization: ddsw1.MCS.COM Contributor, Chicago IL
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

>>holzman@fnalno.fnal.gov (Daniel B. Holzman) writes:
: 
: Eshin, for someone who has complained in the past that there's too much flamage
: in alt.pagan, you sure are rude.  Perhaps you should look to yourself in the
: future before berating the rest of us.
: -- 
: Daniel B. Holzman                   
: HOLZMAN@FNAL.BITNET                
: HOLZMAN@FNALC.FNAL.GOV.INTERNET   <<<

You have a point. I stand corrected.

However I must make an observation, that is, in reference to the above
statements, I was not directing them to any one else on the net except
Chris.

Unfortunately Chris chose to publicly "show off" his verbage instead of
using email as he eventually suggested.

Truce.

Eshin-Fun
From: minhaszt@ucunix.san.uc.edu (Zafar T Minhas)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.sabaean
Subject: new to this group
Date: 28 Sep 92 04:34:43 GMT
Organization: University of Cincinnati

hi, i am new to this group. i am not a sabean, but i would like to know
if this is the same sabean group that is mentioned in the quran as one of
the people of the book?

thanks for the help.

zafar minhas
Newsgroups: alt.religion.sabaean,alt.pagan,alt.magick,alt.astrology,misc.misc,uk.general
From: akcs.whoite@ddsw1.MCS.COM (vicki m. ortega)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.sabaean
Subject: new to this group
Date: 30 Sep 92 05:00:04 CDT


   rcmolden at parmesan.cs.wisc.edu
   [Robertc. Moldenhauer]  Writes:

>No, it's another one of those "weird 'new age' groups" that seem to exist
>in the dark netherworld of alt.  The real Sabaeaans like Bilqis their best
>known queen and her lover Solomon are long dead.  The alt groups were
>created
>to have fun, not to get serious.  Sci.archaeology or Soc.culture.arabic
>would
>be the place to go if you want to talk about the early inhabitants of the 
>Arabian penisula.

 No Sabaeanism is not "new age" it is accually very old age if you care to
know.  And it does not have groupies as far as I know either. Sabaeanism is
only weird to those who don't yet have an understanding of what it is about.
Read the Axioms that were posted earlier, they will give you some idea.

 Anyway I thought that alt. groups were created for discussions on topics
that did not have to be put up for a vote or poll to see if they would be
read or not (and please correct my if I'm wrong) and not just to have fun.
There are alt groups that have both serious and fun discussions going on at
the same time. Hopefully this can also be one of them.
 
axiom: A healthy mind is a conscience that is never offended.

axiom: We can only recognize that which we are familiar with; therefore when
we are offended, we may be realizing a fault in something or someone else
that we resent in or of ourselves.

Think about it.  :-)

vicki


Newsgroups: alt.religion.sabaean,alt.pagan,alt.magick,alt.astrology