HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: venky@thelonious.bellcore.com (G A Venkatesh)
Subject: Re: Gore Blasts Bush Veto Of Cable Bill
Reply-To: venky@thelonious.bellcore.com (G A Venkatesh)
Organization: Bellcore, Morristown NJ
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 92 18:57:22 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.175035.6209@tamsun.tamu.edu> dlb5404@tamsun.tamu.edu (Daryl Biberdorf) writes:
>>Please note that there *are* no mandatory "conditions of franchise"
>>that can be "enforced" by the "city" under deregulation.  Monopolies
>>abound in that industry and this bill addresses only those franchises
>>that lack competition.
>
>Why can't they be enforced?  Many cities contract out services like
>garbage collection (to companies like Laidlaw and Waste Management) who
>operate more-or-less as a monopoly (is there any way to get out of
>a residential garbage collection fee?).  The cities are certainly
>free to cancel their contract for poor performance.  Why can't cable
>be done the same way -- perform or leave.

Because replacing a cable company is not as easy as replacing a garbage
collection company? Because, such a replacement would involve some discomfort
and possibly temporary disconnection and even re-enrollment on part of the
consumer (since the cable rates are not included in the municipal/property
taxes), the same consumers who are likely to be spoilt enough to take out 
their anger on the city council for interfering with their life rather than 
see the need for the change? Besides, if you have had experience with the
cable companies, they all come from the same school. It is a chicken and egg
problem.

venky
From: raisch@Control.COM (Robert Raisch)
Newsgroups: alt.cable-tv.re-regulate
Subject: Ok, it passed...now, what does it mean?
Date: 7 Oct 92 14:43:58 GMT
Distribution: alt
Organization: Control Technology Corp., Hopkinton MA

Just started looking... Excuse my tardiness.

I spoke with the GenManage of the local, and she stated that this would
"put us out of business, or at the very least, increase the price to the
point where we would lose subscribers in droves."

I would be very interested in seeing a copy of the bill.  Anyone got?

Also, all arguments aside, what are the really objectionable parts, from
the provider's standpoint?

Yes, cable is expensive.  And yes, it's a veritable monopoly, based on it's
transport, but is this just a case of the mega-moolah boys sucking the 
everyman anemic, or is there more to it?

Thanks.  (And if this is old hat, drop me a line, don't post.)  </rr>
-- 
--
I hate 3 things: Ignorance, Poverty, and Moving.  Well, maybe not in that order.
Newsgroups: alt.cable-tv.re-regulate,rec.video.cable-tv,misc.consumers
From: tenney@netcom.com (Glenn S. Tenney)
Subject: Re: Gore Blasts Bush Veto Of Cable Bill
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 08:09:25 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.175035.6209@tamsun.tamu.edu> dlb5404@tamsun.tamu.edu (Daryl Biberdorf) writes:
> ...
>Why can't they be enforced?  Many cities contract out services like
>garbage collection (to companies like Laidlaw and Waste Management) who
>operate more-or-less as a monopoly (is there any way to get out of
>a residential garbage collection fee?).  The cities are certainly
>free to cancel their contract for poor performance.  Why can't cable
>be done the same way -- perform or leave.

Contracts for things like garbage collection are often controlled
in some way by the city (or municipality) -- eg. the rate is
regulated.  As noted below, this can not be done for cable TV.

Second, when a city wants to change garbage providers, they can
easily do it.  Cable is different.  Why?  First, they have
already challenged such terminations on first amendment
bases.  Have you ever heard of a garbage company challenging
a termination on first amendment grounds?  Neither have I.
Second, cable companies have installed physical cable which they do
not have to transfer to a new company, and which takes a long time
to de-install and re-install.  A temporary loss of service in a
change of cable systems (not a tranfer of ownership from one to
another, but when one is kicked out!) can easily take a year.
This is not the same thing as a day or two outage.

>Since the city has the final decision about who gets the cable
>franchise (and the town I live in is on its third cable company
>since 1987), I really can't see any reason why the city cannot
>stipulate levels of service and pricing structures for the cable
>operator.  Is there something I'm missing here?

Yes.  The current law (before this new bill takes effect) 
precludes any stipulations on levels of service or pricing.
In other words, no city may legally have any say on what
a cable system carries, or what it charges -- period.
-- 
Glenn Tenney
voice: (415) 574-3420      fax: (415) 574-0546
tenney@netcom.com          Ham radio: AA6ER
Newsgroups: alt.cable-tv.re-regulate,rec.video.cable-tv,misc.consumers
From: sparkle@access.digex.com (Pat)
Subject: Re: Gore Blasts Bush Veto Of Cable Bill
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 19:38:12 GMT

In article <1992Oct07.172213.13145@cpqhou.compaq.com> thomasr@cpqhou.UUCP (Thomas Rush) writes:
>In article <1992Oct6.002648.11653@samba.oit.unc.edu> Nigel.Allen@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Nigel Allen) writes:
>>
>>Here is a press release from the Clinton/Gore Campaign
>
>	Ooops.  Try reading it this way:
>
>>   ALBUQUERQUE, N.M., Oct. 3 -- Once again, Albert Gore
>>is trashing taxpayers to take care of his rich friends in 
>>the big networks, a libertarian said today.
>>   Campaigning in New Mexico when the White House announced
>>the President's veto of the cable bill that would create yet
>>another government bureaucracy to regulate a government-imposed
>>monopoly, a bill Gore helped write and pass.
>>   "Albert Gore has trumpeted the least important consumer
>>legislation of the year all to protect his rich friends in
>>the broadcast networks," said Rush, a citizen supporting much
>>less government.  "Cable television consumers are getting
>>ripped off and Albert Gore is giving the networks and Federal
>>Government permission to do make it worse."
>>   Gore urged the Senate to override the President's veto
>>when it votes on Monday. Gore is expected to return to the
>>Senate for the vote. The conference report on the bill --
>>that is, the legislation crafted from the bills passed by
>>the House and Senate -- passed the Senate on Sept. 22 by an
>>overwhelming majority.
>>   The Cable Television Consumer Protection Act would
>>screw consumers by giving local authorities more power
>>over basic cable service, but acknowleges the benefit of
>>the free market by requiring the FCC to use areas where 
>>there is competition to determine fair prices in areas
>>where there is no competition.
>>   "Once again, it's clear whose side Albert Gore is on.
>>He's standing square with the big networks and big government,
>>the monopolies that have been raising taxes and squeezing the
>>taxpayer.  I and the Libertarian Party are standing with the
>>consumers, with the hard working Americans who are tired
>>of paying more and getting less when it comes to government."
>>said Rush. "Albert Gore and Bill Clinton want
>>more of the same -- taxes rising faster than inflation for
>>consumers who are paying more and getting less. It's time
>>for a change."
>> -30-
>
>Product of my mind only.
>
>
>thomas rush				uunet!cpqhou!thomasr
>compaq computer corporation		their employee,
>deep in the hearth of texas		not their opinions.
>




Very clever, Mr. Rush.  But I'm afraid that you have been guilty
of inappropriate "netiquette."  Since you didn't delete the ">"
that preceeds each line you changed, you are leading the reader
to assume that either Mr. Allen or the news service he quoted
actually wrote your parody.  You might get into a little trouble
by attributing such weirdness to others.

Pat
From: alizard@tweekco.uucp (A.Lizard)
Newsgroups: alt.cable-tv.re-regulate
Subject: Censorship and Jack Decker
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 92 01:47:07 PDT
Organization: Tweek-Com Systems, Moraga, CA

The President's Commission on Pornography (buy the report, by the way,
while it is worthless as scientific research, the lists of porno
films and the reviews of many of them are worthwhile) spent millions
of dollars to "prove" that porno leads to criminal behavior, and
failed. 

Jack, I challenge you to provide us with evidence of any connection
backed by scientific research between pornography and violent criminal
conduct. YOU made the assertion. Back it up or shut up.

A.Lizard
Xref: sparky alt.cable-tv.re-regulate:493 rec.video.cable-tv:1732 misc.consumers:17529
From: chrz@tellabs.com (Peter Chrzanowski)
Newsgroups: alt.cable-tv.re-regulate,rec.video.cable-tv,misc.consumers
Subject: Re: Gore Blasts Bush Veto Of Cable Bill
Date: 7 Oct 92 17:40:33 GMT
Organization: Tellabs, Inc.

In article <1992Oct6.042011.16439@tamsun.tamu.edu>, dlb5404@tamsun.tamu.edu (Daryl Biberdorf) writes:
> In article <1992Oct6.002648.11653@samba.oit.unc.edu> Nigel.Allen@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Nigel Allen) writes:
> >
> >Here is a press release from the Clinton/Gore Campaign
> >
> > Gore Blasts Bush Veto Of Cable Bill
> >
> >   ALBUQUERQUE, N.M., Oct. 3 -- Once again, George Bush 
> >is trashing consumers to take care of his rich friends in 
> >the big cable companies, Sen. Al Gore (D-Tenn.) said today.
> >   Campaigning in New Mexico when the White House announced
> >thr President's veto of the cable bill that would protect
> >consumers from skyrocketing cable television rates, a bill
> >Gore helped write and pass.
> >   "George Bush has vetoed the most important consumer
> >legislation of the year all to protect his rich friends in
> 
> :sarcasm_on.
> 
> Great.  I guess it's now time to pass the 27th amendment to the
> United States Consitution that guarantees the right to cheap cable
> television.
> 
> :sarcasm_off.
> 
> It's truly hard to believe that with a national deficit as high as
> ours is and with a host of social ills plaguing the country, the *one*
> issue the Congress has been able to override Bush's veto on is
> CABLE TELEVISION.  
> 
> I don't much care for the local cable franchise, but it really is the
> city's job to properly stipulate and enforce the conditions of the
> franchise, not the federal government.
> 
> Maybe the public *is* as dumb as the so-called elitists say they are.

 What's really funny, in a ghastly sort of way, is that this is the
 very first time Congress has been able to override the President's
 veto.  Of all the issues facing the U.S.A., the price of television
 entertainment is apparently the only issue that Congress is willing
 to confront. 
>
From: kachun@astro.as.arizona.edu (Ka Chun Yu)
Newsgroups: alt.cable-tv.re-regulate
Subject: Copy of the bill
Date: 13 Oct 92 06:23:42 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ

Can someone email me the copy of the cable bill that's in the ftp site?
I can't seem to get to that site from here.

Thanks

--
*Ka Chun Yu                * "I'm going down to Cowtown, the cow's a friend of *
*kachun@as.arizona.edu     *  me; he lives beneath the ocean and that's where  *
*But you should reply to:  *  I will be.  Beneath the waves, the waves..."     *
*kachun@vela.Colorado.EDU  *                                      --Cowtown    *
Newsgroups: alt.cable-tv.re-regulate,rec.video.cable-tv,misc.consumers
From: wdp@gagme.chi.il.us (Bill Pfeiffer)
Subject: Re: Gore Blasts Bush Veto Of Cable Bill
Originator: wdp@gagme
Organization: Gagme Public Access UNIX, Chicago, Illinois.
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 06:41:32 GMT

In article <1992Oct6.042011.16439@tamsun.tamu.edu> dlb5404@tamsun.tamu.edu
(Daryl Biberdorf) writes: 
>:sarcasm_on.
>
>Great.  I guess it's now time to pass the 27th amendment to the
>United States Consitution that guarantees the right to cheap cable
>television.
>
>:sarcasm_off.
>
>It's truly hard to believe that with a national deficit as high as
>ours is and with a host of social ills plaguing the country, the *one*
>issue the Congress has been able to override Bush's veto on is
>CABLE TELEVISION.  

  ______                      _    ,
    /   /              /     ' )  /
   /   /_  __.  ____  /_      /  / ____. .
  /   / /_(_/|_/ / <_/ <_    (__/_(_) (_/_
                              //
                             (/


    /)           _/_ /       _/_                                 _/_         /)
   //  __,_      /  /_  __.  /      ______  __________  _  ____  /      ____//
  //__(_) (_    <__/ /_(_/|_<__    / / / <_(_) / / / <_</_/ / <_<__    (_) /__
 />                                                                       />
</                                                                       </
                                                   #
 #####                                            ###
#     #    ##    #    #     #     #####   #   #   ###
#         #  #   ##   #     #       #      # #    ###
 #####   #    #  # #  #     #       #       #      #
      #  ######  #  # #     #       #       #
#     #  #    #  #   ##     #       #       #     ###
 #####   #    #  #    #     #       #       #     ###
	

I support the bill, from what I have heard of it, but
GEEZ, people, like Tom Snyder said ... 'happy day, now we can get the 
Disney channel for $2.00 less per month.

Can we get some perspective, here please!!! 

>Maybe the public *is* as dumb as the so-called elitists say they are.

MAYBE!

>Daryl
>-- 
>Daryl Biberdorf  N5GJM    d-biberdorf@tamu.edu or  dlb5404@tamsun.tamu.edu
>
From: bryan@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Newsgroups: alt.cable-tv.re-regulate
Subject: Customer service
Date: 13 Oct 92 12:25:11 CDT
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services

I'm curious about the language of Section 10(d)(1) of the bill as
passed by the Senate in January. It has to do with FCC standards for
customer service.

I'm interested in just exactly how the FCC is going to set up the
required standards and how customers might influence those standards.

My specific concern is this: service from our local company is the
pits. Some channels don't come in clearly in some parts of town,
service calls take over a month to schedule, and so on. I get the
impression from some of the other postings I've read here that these
aren't necessarily uncommon problems.

I'm particularly concerned with maintenance scheduling. Our local
operator frequently does maintenance during early prime and prime
times, frequently disrupting service on all channels in the middle of
news broadcasts. If cable operators are to be made effectively
answerable to public interest, convenience or necessity, this can't be
permitted.

Who might I contact to suggest that 'safe harbor' standards be set for
disruptive testing?

-Bryan
Newsgroups: alt.cable-tv.re-regulate,rec.video.cable-tv,misc.consumers
From: thomasr@cpqhou.compaq.com (Thomas Rush)
Subject: Re: Gore Blasts Bush Veto Of Cable Bill
Reply-To: thomasr@cpqhou.UUCP (Thomas Rush)
Organization: Compaq Computer Corporation
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 92 17:22:13 GMT

In article <1992Oct6.002648.11653@samba.oit.unc.edu> Nigel.Allen@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Nigel Allen) writes:
>
>Here is a press release from the Clinton/Gore Campaign

	Ooops.  Try reading it this way:

>   ALBUQUERQUE, N.M., Oct. 3 -- Once again, Albert Gore
>is trashing taxpayers to take care of his rich friends in 
>the big networks, a libertarian said today.
>   Campaigning in New Mexico when the White House announced
>the President's veto of the cable bill that would create yet
>another government bureaucracy to regulate a government-imposed
>monopoly, a bill Gore helped write and pass.
>   "Albert Gore has trumpeted the least important consumer
>legislation of the year all to protect his rich friends in
>the broadcast networks," said Rush, a citizen supporting much
>less government.  "Cable television consumers are getting
>ripped off and Albert Gore is giving the networks and Federal
>Government permission to do make it worse."
>   Gore urged the Senate to override the President's veto
>when it votes on Monday. Gore is expected to return to the
>Senate for the vote. The conference report on the bill --
>that is, the legislation crafted from the bills passed by
>the House and Senate -- passed the Senate on Sept. 22 by an
>overwhelming majority.
>   The Cable Television Consumer Protection Act would
>screw consumers by giving local authorities more power
>over basic cable service, but acknowleges the benefit of
>the free market by requiring the FCC to use areas where 
>there is competition to determine fair prices in areas
>where there is no competition.
>   "Once again, it's clear whose side Albert Gore is on.
>He's standing square with the big networks and big government,
>the monopolies that have been raising taxes and squeezing the
>taxpayer.  I and the Libertarian Party are standing with the
>consumers, with the hard working Americans who are tired
>of paying more and getting less when it comes to government."
>said Rush. "Albert Gore and Bill Clinton want
>more of the same -- taxes rising faster than inflation for
>consumers who are paying more and getting less. It's time
>for a change."
> -30-

Product of my mind only.


thomas rush				uunet!cpqhou!thomasr
compaq computer corporation		their employee,
deep in the hearth of texas		not their opinions.

Newsgroups: alt.cad
From: d88-jli@nada.kth.se (Jouni Lindqvist)
Subject: Freeware X-windows CAD application?
Organization: Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 13:25:14 GMT

Hi!

i. 	Does this newsgroup contain a FAQ?

ii.	I couldn't find any so I'll have to post this!

	Is there a freeware simple CAD application under X-windows
	somewhere out there?

	If you are writing one I could try/test it out for you!


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                 ___ ___
                                /  //  /\  
                               /  //  / /
                              /  //  / /       
                             /  //  / /
                            /  //  / /
                      _____/  //  /_/__
		     /       / /      /\ 
                    /_______//_______/ /
                    \_______\\_______\/

Jouni Lindqvist, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
From: frankp@ctron.com (Frank Perreault)
Newsgroups: alt.cad
Subject: Re: Design CAD, and other low cost packages
Date: 7 Oct 92 17:19:45 GMT
Reply-To: frankp@olympus.ctron.com (Frank Perreault)
Organization: Cabletron Systems INc.

In article <0crzc6-@rpi.edu> gilem@aix02.ecs.rpi.edu (Michael R. Gile) writes:
>Has anyone had good/bad experiences with DesignCAD.  I am looking for a decnet
>CAD package to use with my pc, and would like to know what people are most 
>impressed with.  I use windows, but there seems to be only limited windows
>packages out there, and most of the good ones (like Vellum) are extremely 
>overpriced.  I would be interested in using this for simple CAD drawings 
>(mechanical and electronic schematics), and this is why the DesignCAD symbol
>libraries look so good to me.  Are there any other suggestions?  Student 
>pricing would help.
>
>Mike
>gilem@rpi.edu

I recently purchased DesignCAD 3D and I was pretty happy with its functionality.

I guess the only disappointment I had with the package is that it really is
designed for modeling, drawing etc. in a 3D plane. If you are looking to do
a lot of serious 2D work you'd definitely would want to use their 2D package.
Though I haven't used their 2D package its had many good reviews from the
various PC magazines.

For the simple type of drawings you're looking to do you'd probably want to
check out DesignCad 2D.  Though AutoCad and other high end packages have
more functionality I think DesignCad may fit your price/functionality bill.

--- Frank ---
From: batzel@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (John B. Batzel)
Newsgroups: alt.cad
Subject: Need a CSE/EE CAD program for MSDOS
Date: 12 Oct 92 15:24:33 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania


Heya.

I'm taking a digital design course at this University, and as we build
circuits we need to hand in schematics.  The provided software is
CASE, but I find it awkward and counter-intuitive.  I've been using
EEDRAW on my PC, but it has some problems, too, i.e. it draws wires
from screen location to location, so when I move a chip I have to
erase and redraw the line... Ack.  I can live with that, but is there
something else out there (Shareware or PD or the like -- we're really
broke students here!) that will do a better job?  Basically we're
dealing with TTL's.

Any information would be greatly appreciated by the class of CSE370!

John B. Batzel
CETS Coordinating Consultant
University of Pennsylvania
Newsgroups: alt.cad
From: changl@ecf.toronto.edu (CHANG LI)
Subject: Digitizer in autoCAD
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 01:29:32 GMT

Hi,

I am going to be a new user of autoCAD.
I intend on using the TABLET MENU with a digitizer and a puck.
I have a few questions maybe you could help me.


1) Does the TABLET MENU come with the autoCAD softwear?
   So if I have a digitizer then I can use the TABLET MENU?  True/False?

2) There is such a thing as a template, is it simply a piece of paper
   that I can color photocopy?

3) I have asked around in the computer stores around Spadina and College.
   The prices are $475 for a large digitizer with puck, no template
		  $450 Summasketch II plus 12x12 digitizer, no template
		       with puck
		  $239 9x6 inch digitizer with template.

   How do these prices sound?


All comments and suggestions are greatly appreciated.
I intend on using autoCad to do mechanical drawings.

Is there a 1-800 number I could call about autoCad?  Customer service?

Thank you.



      Li Chang   Comp Eng 9T4                     ____
  First Class of Computer Engineering            /_|__\--,
     @ the University of Toronto           []Oo. `0-----0'

     changl@ecf.toronto.edu
-- 



      Li Chang   Comp Eng 9T4                     ____
Newsgroups: alt.cad.autocad
From: kelson@ais.org (David Lewis)
Subject: plotting to more than 1 plotter in acad12
Organization: UMCC
Distribution: us
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 04:41:30 GMT




   We have autocad 12 here, and we have a plotter and a laser printer.
We want to print to both of them from time to time, but because we 
print on a network, we have to print to a file because the protected
mode adi drivers wont send to a queue file directly.  The problem is,
if we print to a file and use the acadplcmd command so it dumps to the
queue automatically, we cannot switch back and forth between the
plotter and the laser.  Is there a way around this?  We use novell
3.11
From: bennett@erich.triumf.ca (P.Bennett)
Newsgroups: alt.cad.autocad
Subject: Re:      Inexpensive CAD programs for MS-DOS
Date: 16 Oct 1992 09:15 PDT
Organization: TRIUMF: Tri-University Meson Facility
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: erich.triumf.ca
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

In article <AUTOCAD%92101518254953@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>,         Dale Webb <VETS009@UNLVM.BITNET> writes...
>HP Laser Jet.  I would also prefer it did not require a mouse (I hate the
>things).  I do NOT have Windoze either and have neither the time nor the
>inclination to buy or install it.  I need something that doesn't take a
>PhD in AutoCad to use.
>   Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
>   Dale Webb

I recall a review of "house drawing" programs in a recent magazine (PC
Magazine?), but don't recall any details... (I wasn't in thte market)

I think it would be severe agony to use any CAD program without a mouse, or
similar pointing device, although most probably permit you to use the cursor
keys, and many programs will permit you to enter co-ordintates manually.

Peter Bennett VE7CEI                | Vessels shall be deemed to be in sight
Internet: bennett@erich.triumf.ca   | of one another only when one can be
Bitnet:   bennett@triumfer          | observed visually from the other
TRIUMF, Vancouver, B.C., Canada     |                          ColRegs 3(k)