HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: nightsng@anarky.tch.org (Nightsong)
Newsgroups: alt.consciousness
Subject: Re: Next?
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 03:46:12 PST
Organization: The Canned Ham, San Jose, CA.

> Here are a few books dealing with mind that  I've read lately:
>
> Parallel Universes, by Fred Alan Wolfe, Ph.D.
> The Holographic Universe, by Michael Talbot
> The Improbable Machine, by Campbell
> Syncronicity "The bridge between mind & Matter", by F. David Peat, Ph.D.
> Quantum Reality "beyond the new physics", by Nick Herbert
> Beyond the Quantum, by Michael Talbot
> The Dreams of Reason, by Heinz R. Pagels, Ph.D.
> Apprentices of Wonder, by Allman

I would recommend _Synchronicity_ which you listed -- It's really good so 
far (I have noticed that most stuff written by F. David Peat or 
co-written by him as well is really good) although  I am not through with 
it (still reading it.. takes a while)

-Nightsong
From: nightsng@anarky.tch.org (Nightsong)
Newsgroups: alt.consciousness
Subject: Re: NEXT
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 03:39:22 PST
Organization: The Canned Ham, San Jose, CA.

jjozwiak@shearson.com (Jenny Jozwiak) writes:

> In article <ljc0g8INNnps@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>, emarsh@hernes-sun.Eng.Sun.COM
> (Eric Marsh) wrote:
> >
> 
> >Another thing you should consider is that intelligence is only one
> > aspect of evolution. As I mentioned earlier, it is possible that mind
> > is not simply a working of the brain, but an attribute of the universe
> > itself. Should this be the case, it is possible that we could evolve
> > towards greater mental powers without necessairly becoming more intelligent
> 
> YES!! This is something I have been thinking about recently....maybe humans w
> to a point where our minds will be capable of breaking physical boundries, su
> moving objects, or even utilizing our latent psychic abilities such as predic
> now, but "the scientific community" seems to invalidate much of whatever evid
> is, by saying that it is not "repeatable under scientific controlled conditio
> or measurable in scientific ways etc.  Well, you dont use a clock to measure 
> so maybe there are other ways of measuring "psi" abilities, other than standa
> "scientific" ones....just a thought....I love when the impossible is accompli
> more we know the more there is to learn...
> 
> 
> Jenny
> 
> 


I think that most scientists have been educated to think that the 
"Scientific Method" is the only truly scientific way to perform any 
experiment.  This really gets in the way when you think about how much of 
science is NOT objective, as they seem to like to think it is, but 
actually subjective (think of quantum theory, although it IS just a 
theory)

Anyway, to the point --

I *DO* believe in telepathy -- that is if my mother is truly real.  In 
the reality I have assumed myself to be in for most of my life, I do 
believe in it.  However, there is also the possibility that you are all 
figments of my imagination, but I will *NOT* get into this at the moment 
as it would take up pages (I tend to ramble, especially after Douglas 
Adams books.)

-Nightsong
Newsgroups: alt.consciousness,talk.origins,talk.religion.misc
From: jrm@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu
Newsgroups: alt.consciousness
Subject: Re: Next?
Date: 30 Dec 92 17:17:51 -0500

In article <aquilanm.725694316@helium>, aquilanm@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (Mark T Aquilano ) writes:
> 
> I've been reading the discussion about linking the human brain directly
> with a database containing the sum of human knowledge.  This is an idea that
> is gaining in popularity among computer buffs, if what I read in Mondo 2000
> from time to time is any indication.  But so far, no one on this discussion
> groups has questioned whether our brains have certain biological limits.
> Are our brains designed (by nature, not some omnipotent being!) to handle 
> enormous quantities of factual information of the sort we fill encyclopedias
> with?  Can our organic "neural network" be overloaded?  What would happen if 
> it were?  If we were to make such a radical change in the way one part of
> our bodies functioned, how would the rest of our bodies compensate for this 
> change?  Finally - a question that might sound really stupid on the surface, but
> with CD-ROMS aleady able to store whole libraries for us at their early
> stage of development, why would a direct connection to a database through our
> brains really be an improvement in the quality of our lives?

	Do your lug around your CD-ROM encyclopedia everywhere you
	go ? I think what most of us were talking about insofar as
	direct links to databases would be the equivalent to opening
	a 'app window' that one sees and hears - and then searching
	for information on certian subjects. No keyboard, no screen,
	no box to lug around ... quiet instant data, heavily cross
	indexed. As this format would be emulating the normal means
	of inputting info into the brain, it has the same limitations
	as that method. 

	I think some people imagine something more extreme along
	these lines however. Something like 'virtual' memory where
	the info is availible to your mind just as if you had
	learned it via the usual means. In this scenerio, there
	is no real boundary between where your brain stops and
	the machines begin. This would be impossibly difficult
	to implement - anytime soon that is - because we really
	don't even know how real memory is stored and accessed.
	Also, if the net ever went down, you would have a totally
	helpless population because most of what they 'knew'
	would be cut off and if personal experiences were also
	shared between hardware and wetware, you would have only
	an abbreviated subset of even your own experiences if
	the net crashed.

-- Jim Mason
From: jrm@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu
Newsgroups: alt.consciousness
Subject: Re: Next?
Date: 26 Dec 92 01:15:01 -0500
Distribution: alt.consciousness

In article <Stephen.H.Voss.2.6.0@nd.edu>, Stephen.H.Voss.2@nd.edu (Stephen H. Voss) writes:
> I agree that all phenomena have causal roots, and that this includes 
> consciousness.  We have not sufficiently noticed something that follows from 
> this.  Human and other consciousness may well be a new and tiny corner of 
> the universe.  But one feature of the stuff present at the beginning, say a 
> nanosecond after the big bang, was this:  it contained within itself the 
> seeds of consciousness.  That is, a description of the stuff in the universe 
> at that time in purely physical terms--mass, velocity, charge, spin, what 
> have you--would necessary be an incomplete description of its character.  
> This stuff was, in addition, at that moment, that which would one day give 
> birth to the consciousness of Bach, Patricia Churchland, Amos Alonzo Stagg, 
> Rudolf Carnap, you, and this present reflection on the whole process.
> 
> This is at least one thing that it means to say that consciousness is 
> intrinsic to the universe, just as spacetime is.  There may or may not 
> always have been consciousness--but what we can say is that no matter how 
> far back in the history of the universe you go, you will find that which 
> contained the capacity to generate consciousness under the right conditions, 
> and that which contained the capacity to generate just such conditions.
> 
> This notion is perhaps implicit in some of Leibniz's work, and no doubt 
> others' as well.  But current reflection on consciousnessness is 
> insufficiently conscious of the point.

	The primordial universe may have indeed posessed the 
	possiblilty of consciousness within it ... but this
	may not mean anything. Other possible universes may
	have posessed far greater potential for consciousness.

	What I am trying to say is not to make too much of
	the expression of consciousness (assuming that we
	posess anything even remotely resembling consciousness)
	in the current environment. 

	To assume that we have something special is purest 
	egotism. Many, many possible variations on the basic
	physics of universes could have provided conditions
	suitable for the evolution of consciousness. 

	These conditions which allow the possibility of
	consciousness, even if rare, do not imply some
	special or guided situation. If we are conscious,
	it is by purest luck. Assume no future guidance
	via universal principal. Just because apples are
	red does not imply that there is something 
	important about that color.

	People seem to crave a path to being greater than 
	they are. Understandable. Alas, this leads to
	interpreting natural phenomena with a bias. 

	-JM
Newsgroups: alt.consciousness
Subject: Re: Next?
From: Stafford@Vax2.Winona.MSUS.EDU (John Stafford)
Date: 29 Dec 92 16:00:04 -0600
Followup-To: alt.consciousness,talk.origins,talk.religion.misc
 <1992Dec18.133633.18565@linus.mitre.org> <1992Dec26.193212.26274@cybernet.cse.fau.edu>
Distribution: world
Organization: MSUS

In article <1992Dec26.193212.26274@cybernet.cse.fau.edu>,
steve@sunrise.cse.fau.edu (Steve Smith) wrote:
> 
> I think we are evloving toward a sort of group-conciousness.  Whether
> it be through some internal mechanism or faculty not yet developed 
> (evolved) or existant but rarely exercised, though some external
> mechanism of our own invention, or through some combination of both,
> we are quickly "linking up" and tapping into a group or global 
> conciousness.  We can get a glimse of what is to come by participating
> in phenomena like the Net or through psychadelic experience.
> 
> Thoughts, anyone?

Yes.  We are all the same person.  I am a delusion of yours.
From: jrm@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu
Newsgroups: alt.consciousness
Subject: Re: NEXT
Date: 30 Dec 92 17:29:22 -0500

In article <1992Dec30.182541.24174@shearson.com>, jjozwiak@shearson.com (Jenny Jozwiak) writes:
> In article <ljc0g8INNnps@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>, emarsh@hernes-sun.Eng.Sun.COM
> (Eric Marsh) wrote:
>>
> 
>>Another thing you should consider is that intelligence is only one
>> aspect of evolution. As I mentioned earlier, it is possible that mind
>> is not simply a working of the brain, but an attribute of the universe
>> itself. Should this be the case, it is possible that we could evolve
>> towards greater mental powers without necessairly becoming more intelligent.
> 
> YES!! This is something I have been thinking about recently....maybe humans will evolve
> to a point where our minds will be capable of breaking physical boundries, such as
> moving objects, or even utilizing our latent psychic abilities such as predicting events or reading minds etc.  It is possible that we are capable of doing some of these things
> now, but "the scientific community" seems to invalidate much of whatever evidence there
> is, by saying that it is not "repeatable under scientific controlled conditions",
> or measurable in scientific ways etc.  Well, you dont use a clock to measure liquid....
> so maybe there are other ways of measuring "psi" abilities, other than standard 
> "scientific" ones....just a thought....I love when the impossible is accomplished.  The
> more we know the more there is to learn...

	Why is it that after 100+ years where decent scientists fail
	to produce proof of PSI/ESP that people accuse the
	'scientific community' of some conspiracy to suppress and
	discredit the idea ? The 'scientific community' is pretty
	much cutthroat - anyone who can prove a new idea races to
	publish before everyone else so they can get sole credit.

	If you can't reproduce something under controlled conditions
	then either your control scheme is faulty or what you
	are trying to prove is false. People have been trying to
	prove - or even mostly-prove - PSI for the past century and
	have tried about every variation of 'control' imaginable.
	If there is PSI, it is so hard to replecate that it is
	essentially useless to anyone. Hmmm ... maybe when the
	aliens return Elvis' brain we will recieve instructions
	on how to PSI more usefully ??? 


Newsgroups: alt.consciousness
From: mw@ki.fht-mannheim.de (Marc Wachowitz)
Subject: Re: New Electronic Journal - Psyche
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 92 17:42:13 GMT
Organization: Fachhochschule fuer Technik Mannheim
Reply-To: x91007@phillip.edu.au
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]

Recently I wrote:

: [I'm only forwarding this article; please send questions etc. to the
:  address below -- Marc]
: 
: ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
: Announcement: New Electronic Magazine 'Psyche'.
: 
[...]
: 
: Yours sincerely,
:                          Patrick Wilken
: 
: x91007@phillip.edu.au

Still some people have asked me about subscription etc.
Please direct everything concerning 'Psyche' explicitly
to the address: x91007@phillip.edu.au

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Marc Wachowitz, mw@ki.fht-mannheim.de   /  news zombie - reply by e-mail, too
  *  wonder everyday    *    nothing in particular    *    all is special  *
From: adrie@ica.philips.nl (Adrie Koolen)
Newsgroups: alt.cd-rom
Subject: Re: Problem using EMM386.EXE with CDD461 drive
Date: 22 Dec 92 08:01:09 GMT
Distribution: alt
Organization: Philips Consumer Electronics, Eindhoven, The Netherlands

In article <24621.9212211243@mail.soton.ac.uk> Jon Hall <J.M.Hall@SOUTHAMPTON.AC.UK> writes:
>I've just taken delivery of a Philips (I think this might be Magnavox
>in the US) CDD461 CD-ROM drive. I have found that when EMM386.EXE is
>installed in CONFIG.SYS, reading of files over 64K in size from the CD
>becomes unreliable: files are copied with no error message, but are
>corrupt. This is checked by using COPY to copy files to the hard disk
>followed by FC /B to do a byte-for-byte compare.

The 163 CDROM controller uses DMA to store the incoming bytes in the PC's
memory. The device driver doesn't use the Virtual DMA Services to
translate virtual addresses into physical addresses when the 386's MMU
is in effect. This means that DMA transfers to remapped memory go wrong.
Normally, all data transfer goes through MSCDEX, which normally is stored
in not-remapped memory. You should check where the buffers are in memory
and if the memory has been remapped. MS-Windows 3.1 checks the programming
of the DMA controller and performs the address translation on the fly.

Adrie Koolen (adrie@ica.philips.nl)
Philips Consumer Electronics, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
From: IFF291@DJUKFA11.BITNET (Stephan Petersen)
Newsgroups: alt.cd-rom
Subject: Small scale CD production, where?
Date: 28 Dec 92 12:47:03 GMT
Organization: Forschungszentrum Juelich


Hi!

I'm looking for companies producing ISO 9660 CD-ROMs in smaller numbers
(say, max. 100 copies), preferably located in (but not limited to) Europe.

The data would most likely be on streamer tape.

If anybody has informations on companies offering this kind of service,
please drop me a line.

Thanks,
Stephan

+------------------------------------------+----------------------------+
| Stephan Petersen                         | 5170 Juelich               |
| IFF (Institute for Solid State Research) | GERMANY                    |
| Research Center Juelich                  | st.petersen@kfa-juelich.de |
| P.O. Box 1913                            | IFF291@DJUKFA11            |
+------------------------------------------+----------------------------+
Xref: sparky alt.cd-rom:5316 comp.unix.sysv386:17611 comp.unix.sys5.r4:966
From: davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen)
Newsgroups: alt.cd-rom,comp.unix.sysv386,comp.unix.sys5.r4
Subject: Re: Which CD-ROM under Unix (SVR4)?
Keywords: cd-rom sony unix svr4
Date: 23 Dec 92 20:17:09 GMT
Reply-To: davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center, Schenectady NY

In article <Bzpy5z.HDC@gator.use.com>, larry@gator.use.com (Larry Snyder) writes:

| Are not all of the SVR4 vendors in the same boat (as far as not
| supporting a CD-Rom filesystem -- or have some of them actually
| developed their own CD-Rom fs?)

  And the answer is "I just don't know." I haven't had the chance to go
back and look at the other V.4 version for that particular feature, so I
have no answer for you. Someone posted a CD filesystem for BSD, I was
hoping it would get ported by someone with more time, but I haven't seen
it yet.

-- 
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
    Keyboard controller has been disabled, press F1 to continue.
From: bwilliam@iat.holonet.net (Bill Williams)
Subject: Re: multi-session - what's different?
Organization: HoloNet National Internet Access BBS: 510-704-1058/modem
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 07:04:04 GMT

I think its retarded that the Orange book was utilized, complete with all
its crazy Mode-5 subcode information for CD-ROM use instead of also
offering a fair and simple hack for ISO9660 users. PS the total size of
the volume DOES NOT CHANGE BETWEEN SESSIONS... very odd and
counter-intuitive but true according to some notes I have.


Bill Wiiliams

Newsgroups: alt.cd-rom
From: jeffj@krfiny.uucp (J. Jonas)
Subject: Re: multi-session - what's different?
Organization: Jeff's house of computer pieces
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 18:26:32 GMT

>  So why can't the *software* use the info in the lead-in area about
>  the next session and just ask the drive to go get those tracks?
>  Why must it be hardware-bound?  I thought that you could read any
>  number track anywhere on the cd via the driver, without special
>  hardware...

"on a clear disk, you can seek forever ..."

From what I have ascertained, the CD-ROM firmware reads the disk's label
and ABSOLUTELY PREVENTS you from seeking or reading
beyond the end of data.
That's because the tracks beyond the end of data have no formatting
and will need to time out to fail.
It seems CD-ROMs are too smart for their own good,
(quite unlike floppy drives that will seek to any track, formatted or not).
-- 
Jeffrey Jonas

jeffj@panix.com
Newsgroups: alt.cd-rom
From: pls@cibecue.az05.bull.com (Paul Schauble)
Subject: Re: First GNU CD-ROM
Organization: Bull HN Information Systems, Inc., Phoenix Product Division
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 11:26:45 GMT

In article <63123@mimsy.umd.edu> jerryw@cs.umd.edu (Jerry Wieber) writes:
>In article <1992Dec31.070340.5959@catfish.az05.bull.com> pls@cibecue.az05.bull.com (Paul Schauble) writes:
>>How do these prices fit with the charter of the _Free_ Software Foundation?
>>I just can't see how these prices bear any remote relationship to distribution
>>costs.
>
>They don't.  As I understand it, the FSF uses a high distribution charge
>as a way to support the FSF.  The (mildly underhanded) thought is that
>a donation is hidden in the materials charge, thus slipping unnoticed
>through the paws of the corporate bean counters.
>
It almost sounds like FSF is making a profit on their software and then
putting that profit back into development. I must have misunderstood you,
that would be acting like a regular company, and RMS has spoken against that
many many times.

>Of course, if you really cared about the $$'s you would just buy the GNU
>CD-ROM from Walnut Creek (1-800-786-9907) for $40.
>
>-Jerry
>-- 
>                                                           __________ 
> UUCP:     uunet!cs.umd.edu!jerryw   SPOKEN: Jerry Wieber  |/ `-.    | U of Md
> INTERNET: jerryw@cs.umd.edu                                     \_|.|-,  
>                                                                    ` - 

I was wondering about that, actually. Is there a significant difference in
the contents, I wonder?

    ++PLS

Newsgroups: alt.cd-rom
From: scott@palan.uucp (Scott Boake)
Subject: Netnew on CD rom - who sells that?
Organization: Palantir Systems, Inc.
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 03:58:02 GMT

I rember reading here that someone is offering net news on cd-rom....

who?

Thanks!

---Scott
-- 
----
Scott Boake                                            Palantir Systems, Inc.
scott@palan                                            5030 - 78th Ave N Ste 11
(813) 544-8152                                         Pinellas Park, FL 34665
Newsgroups: alt.cd-rom
From: rodrigo@athena.mit.edu (Rodrigo Figueiredo)
Subject: purchase suggestions
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 19:09:30 GMT

I would appreciate if anyone could help me with information or pointer to
information about formats, compatibility, prices, stores and other issues 
related to cd-roms.
I am planning to buy one to a 486 DOS machine but I cannot figure out what
to buy. 

Please send any e-mail to rfigueir@sloan.mit.edu or rodrigo@athena.mit.edu

Thanks in advance.

Rodrigo Figueiredo.
From: as346@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Bob Mayerovitch)
Newsgroups: alt.cd-rom
Subject: Help wanted -- NEC 72 and PAS16
Date: 21 Dec 1992 22:37:58 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: as346@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Bob Mayerovitch)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


Old to CD-ROM use (my NEC drive) but new to multimedia.
My drive worked fine running off its Trantor 128 SCSI adapter.  However,
the moment I connected it to the Pro Audio Spectrum 16, using Mediavision's
own CD interface kit, the drive disappeared from view.  The Mediavision
driver could find no SCSI adapter, and thus of course no SCSI device, but
the NEC-TRANTOR driver (left in my config.sys by the installation program)
assured me that a SCSI adapter was in fact there.  It also insisted,
however, that no SCSI device was attached.

I've played with Mediavision's configuration program, fiddling with IRQ and
DMA settings, but most of the time this freezes my whole system.

Any suggestions?  SCSI is acting far too scuzzy for my taste.

-- 
rmayerov@rs6000.baldwinw.edu
Newsgroups: alt.cd-rom
From: zhu@athena.mit.edu (Erin Zhu)
Subject: cost of CD-ROM recorders and blanks
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 08:25:49 GMT

Could anyone give me any info on the cost of available CD-ROM 
recorders and blanks in the US?  Email preferred, please.

  --Erin


Xref: sparky alt.cd-rom:5344 comp.multimedia:3941
Organization: Arizona State University
Date: Thursday, 24 Dec 1992 15:12:52 MST
From: <AGCKK@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Newsgroups: alt.cd-rom,comp.multimedia
Subject:    Where is "Multimedia Extension"?

Is it only available in WINDOWS 3.1 packages?