HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks,comp.arch
From: dbmoore@us.oracle.com (Dennis Moore)
Subject: Re: DEC ALPHA Performance Claims
Summary: Sun, HP, IBM announcements followed
Organization: not an official statement of Oracle Corporation, Redwood Shores CA
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 23:52:36 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <1992Nov11.053600.27768@ee.rochester.edu> rhode@ee.rochester.edu (Robert Rhode) writes:
>I suspect the "world's Fastest" title has something to do with the
>fact that Alpha has a nosebleed-fast clock (150 MHz sound right?) AND
>low CPI.  With a GaAs implementation on the way, I think they can count
>on holding the title for a while.

I don't want to in any way imply that I know what I am talking about or that
I have a favorite.  There are many issues in real-world performance (i.e.
like how optimized for the platform are the applications you would use,
what percentage of time is spent in the user interface versus in system
services, etc.) that these benchmarks don't cover.

That said, I watched the HP announcement, which happened later in the day
after the DEC announcement, and HP claimed that their benchmarks were *all*
faster than the DEC benchmarks (2-D, 3-D, shaded graphics; SPECfp, MFLOPS;
integer performance; etc.), so if you mean "4 hours" when you say "a while,"
then you are unquestionably right.  If you mean anything else, then you are
inviting a marketing war of words ;-).

Incidentally, there were also Sun and IBM new product announcements this week
(the same day, I think), as well.

-- Dennis Moore, my own opinions, etcetcetc
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
From: bwolen+@CS.CMU.EDU (Po-Jen Yang)
Subject: SPEC benchmark
Organization: Carnegie Mellon University
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 16:22:02 GMT


-- 

Hi!  I am looking for SPEC suite.  Can anyone tell me where I
can ftp a copy?


Thanks

Bwolen

ps.  please reply to bwolen@cs.cmu.edu
From: MICHAEL.WILLETT@OFFICE.WANG.COM ("Michael Willett")
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
Subject: Re: Raid 7 versus earlier Raid 4 - benchmark performance
Date: 12 Nov 92 15:35:17 GMT
Organization: Mail to News Gateway at Wang Labs

Regarding that article analyzing Raid 7 performance versus that
of the earlier Raid 4 that was suggested on these newsgroups, I
called up Storage Computer today and talked to their senior Raid
guru, John O'Brien.  (The others are at the Storage Computer
booth at the computer show in Boston this week.)  He
indicated that they will be posting it in the next few
days.  He said that those people who have been waiting for
the information and need it right away can call him on the
phone to get it.  His telephone number is 603-889-1961.

Michael.Willett@OFFICE.Wang.com
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks,comp.arch
From: bhandarkar@wrksys.enet.dec.com (Dileep Bhandarkar)
Subject: Re: DEC ALPHA Performance Claims
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: 13 NOV 92 10:35:44    


In article <1992Nov12.193431.13848@sol.UVic.CA>, zapantis@uvphys.phys.uvic.ca (Nik Zapantis) writes...
> 
>DEC has been quoting Mflops for a number of their systems, such as the
>DECstation 5000 family...etc. I am asking if they can supply a Mflop rating
>for the Alpha, that is obtained by using the same Mflop benchmarks that they
>have used to rate some of their other systems. For example, the VAX9000VP
>is rated at 125Mflops. How does the Alpha compare to the VAX9000VP?
> 
The 125 MFlops is a peak rate assuming a vector multiply and a vector add 
simultanously at a 16 ns (62.5 MHz) cycle time. For the current Alpha AXP
family, the peak megaflops are same as clock rate i.e. 133 to 200 Mflops.

Peak megaflops are "guaranteed to never exceed" numbers. Megaflops for various
sizes of Linpack, Livermore Loops, or Perfect Club reflect actual delivered
performance in some benchmark environment. I did post these a couple of days 
ago.
From: hoel@umiacs.umd.edu (Erik Hoel)
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
Subject: Cray Y/MP-8 scalar performance
Date: 13 Nov 92 17:17:01 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: UMIACS, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742

We are looking for benchmark numbers on the Cray Y/MP-8 for scalar (i.e.,
non-vectorizable) operations. Ideally, we would like to be able to relate
the scalar performance of this machine with current state-of-the-art
microprocessors for general purpose computation.

Thanks for any help.

Erik Hoel

hoel@asgard.umiacs.umd.edu
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks,comp.arch
From: eugene@wilbur.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)
Subject: Re: DEC ALPHA Performance Claims
Organization: NAS, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 16:32:17 GMT

In article <BxJ47t.K65.2@cs.cmu.edu> lindsay+@cs.cmu.edu
(Donald Lindsay) writes:
>zapantis@uvphys.phys.UVic.CA writes:
>>How does the SPECfp92 rating relates to Mflops? Is it a one-to-one 
>>relationship?
>There are lots of ways to measure MFLOPS, and they all give different
>answers. Which one are you requesting?

I should say something about this.

Some time ago I was talking to certain members of SPEC, and we were going to
run the entire suite thru a Y-MP with a hardware performance monitor.
Unfortunately, work commitments and porting time weren't a good match.
Several of the code are Cray codes, it's the other codes which aren't which
require a little work.  The relation isn't 1:1; it isn't known.
This is work which should be done.

One of these days I'll have some time to get back to the FAQ......

--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@orville.nas.nasa.gov
  Resident Cynic, Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers
  {uunet,mailrus,other gateways}!ames!eugene
Second Favorite email message: Returned mail: Cannot send message for 3 days
A Ref: Mathematics and Plausible Reasoning, vol. 1, G. Polya
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
From: hblim@iti.gov.sg (Hock-Beng Lim)
Subject: Counting number of MFLOPS
Organization: Information Technology Institute, National Computer Board, Singapore.
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 07:45:19 GMT

I am interested to know of some fairly accurate methods to measure the
number of floating-point operations which a program executes. I am aware
of the hardware counters in machines such as Cray. Are there any software
methods to estimate the number of MFLOP an application takes ?

Please mail me your response. I will post a summary if there is 
sufficient interest.

HB
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hock-Beng Lim                                   | hblim@csrd.uiuc.edu
Center for Supercomputing R&D, UIUC. (on leave) | hblim@iti.gov.sg 
Information Technology Institute, Singapore.    | tel : (65)772-7205,772-7273
From: mab@wdl39.wdl.loral.com (Mark A Biggar)
Subject: Re: Registering "Assault Keys"
Organization: Loral Western Development Labs
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 20:55:21 GMT

In article <k864028@pro-smof.cts.com> wixer!cactus.org!wixer!pro-smof.cts.com!echrist@cactus.org (Therel Moore) writes:
>as for keys being publicly held ,  by the 4th 'papers [plain text] shall be
>avaialable at the presentation of a warrant to the named individual.

Yes, you must surrender the papers, but you don't have to make any effort to
translate them.  E.G. All my papers are written in Outer Slobovian, I got to
turn them over, but they got to get their own translator.  I remember reading
about court cases that deal with just this translation issue.  So, please
explain how excryption is any different then the use of an obscure foreign
language?

--
Mark Biggar
mab@wdl1.wdl.loral.com
From: booloo@framsparc.ocf.llnl.gov (Mark Boolootian)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: 2600 meeting breakup
Date: 13 Nov 92 19:54:31 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

In article <92317.191353U60145@uicvm.uic.edu> U60145@uicvm.uic.edu writes:
>Has anyone heard anything new on the breakup of the 2600 meeting in
>Washington D.C.?  From what I understand (mostly from CuD), they had mall
>security come in and boot everyone, after a search of their persons.  Sounds
>pretty unlawful to me.....

Check out CuD, Volume 4, Issue 57.  It has first person accounts of what
took place at the 2600 meeting.  You can obtain back issues of CuD from
ftp.eff.org:/pub/cud/cud.  The file containing the details of the 2600
meeting is cud4.57.

mb
-- 
Mark Boolootian		booloo@llnl.gov		+1 510 423 1948
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: gurgle@netcom.com (Pete Gontier)
Subject: apology
Summary: I've been posting in the wrong newsgroup
Keywords: misposting wrong group
Organization: cellular
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 07:22:31 GMT

When it comes to the crime of posting in the wrong newsgroup,
I have recently been one of the worst offenders. I will not do
it again. At least not until I forget again, and that will
probably be in another group, so don't worry. I will not
respond to any more gun postings in comp.org.eff.talk. If you
would like to tell me how wrong I am in email, reach me at...
-- 
 Pete Gontier // EC Technology // gurgle@netcom.com
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: colinj@engin.umich.edu (Colin Johnson)
Subject: Re: right to have .plan
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 92 18:50:45 EST
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor
Distribution: usa

	My first reaction to this is that anyone who looks at you .plan
file does so by choice. 

	Colin J.

-- 
Colin Johnson           |Colin.Johnson@um.cc.umich.edu
Ann Arbor Michigan      |colinj@caen.engin.umich.edu


Xref: sparky comp.org.eff.talk:6858 misc.int-property:1409 alt.suit.att-bsdi:605 comp.unix.bsd:8609
From: adam@soda.berkeley.edu (Adam J Richter)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,misc.int-property,alt.suit.att-bsdi,comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: Patents:  What they are.  What they aren't.  Other factors.
Date: 8 Nov 1992 13:49:23 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Nov7.194011.25668@njitgw.njit.edu> ken@eies2.njit.edu (Kenneth  Ng) writes:
>Actually according to a recent article in the New York TImes Science Times,
>the US still leads the world in productivity.  Recent as in the past 6
>months.

	I think that you mean worker productivity, which may largely be
a function of the minimum wage and blanket union agreements that have
effects similar to setting a minimum wage.  If the minimum wage is
$4.35/hr, then only workers that produce at least $4.35 worth of
goods and services per hour will be employed; the rest will be
unemployed.  

	Mind you, I agree that we should have a minimum wage for
a variety of reaons, and I also agree that worker productivity
is a useful statistic for certain purposes, but I think that a
statistic like per capita gross domestic product is a better
measure of national productivity.

-- 
Adam J. Richter				409 Evelyn Avenue, Apt. 312
richter@cerf.net			Albany, CA 94706
					(510)528-3209
Another member of the League for Programming Freedom (league@prep.ai.mit.edu).
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,misc.int-property,alt.suit.att-bsdi,comp.unix.bsd
From: gtoal@ibmpcug.co.uk (Graham Toal)
Subject: Re: Look and Feel Infringement (was: Interface monopolies)
Organization: The IBM PC User Group, UK.
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 19:25:01 GMT

In article <17000.2AFCCAC7@puddle.fidonet.org> Zhahai.Stewart@f93.n104.z1.fidonet.org (Zhahai Stewart) writes:
: niche.  But I think the precedent is terrible; how about if the 
: author of a Science Fiction series sues any authors who have "similar" 
: plotlines, writing styles, etc?  (Imagine the Cyberpunk SF subgenre 
: being copyrighted for life+50 years) That would be a travesty of 
: copyright law, and would inhibit more than enhance.

You try writing a startrek spoof sometime!

G
-- 
Xref: sparky comp.org.eff.talk:6993 misc.int-property:1434
From: ron@zooid.guild.org (Secret Mud)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Software Patents: Promotion of science and the useful arts?
Date: 12 Nov 92 15:27:12 GMT

From: mcgregor@netcom.com (Scott Mcgregor)
>
>PUBLIC key cryptography is not necessary. Private key cryptography
>could provide the same benefits. Even PKE systems are becoming hybrids
>with private keys used for authentication to servers, etc.  And we
>have a Private Key standard, DES. Why isn't it in every mail system?
>Why isn't it in every mail system today?  Why isn't it in net news?
>No I think Joe trivializes the other factors.  Encription is often
>suited to its requirements. Netnews DOES have encryption, rot-13 is
>sufficient for the purposes it is used for in rec.humor and various
>movie reviews. 
>
> ... 247 lines trimmed off ...

One big reason that DES isn't included in every mail system is because many
companies want to sell outside the U.S.  As soon as that software gets to the
border, it becomes "munitions", and requires extensive paperwork to ship
it--if at all.  To ship outside of USA and Canada, you have to be in the
banking industry, or have a fancy exemption.

I worked for a company in Canada, that made DES hard disk encryption cards.
The paperwork needed for a customer to return a card from the US for repair
was simply amazing.

This may have changed over the last few years, but all this paranoia over a
globally available encryption method has slowed down the email use by many
years.

 - Ron Sharp.
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: cb@wixer.cactus.org (Cyberspace Buddha)
Subject: Re: FBI Raids
Organization: Real/Time Communications
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 06:14:26 GMT

Ronco.D.@f138.n101.z1.fidonet.org (Ronco D.) writes:
>From: Dean.O'Donnell@f1389.n101.z1.fidonet.org
> 
>Included in the confiscation were records of everyone who'd ever called
>the BBS.  Now, somewhere in the back of my mind I seem to remember calling 
>Davy Jones' Locker a year or two ago, entering all the standard "new user" 
>info (name, address, phone #), browsing around the message areas, seeing 
>the $40 fee, and not bothering to ever call back.  ("Forty bucks to get 
>on a BBS?  Right!" I seem to remember saying.)
> 
>But now I'm wondering-- I haven't heard or read anything further about
>the case-- and somewhere the FBI has a record that I called a "pirate"
>BBS, and they know my name and address.  
> 
>Now I'm not overly worried about this, but does anyone have any idea
>what the FBI does with the info they get from a BBS raid?  Has anyone
>else heard about this case, and do you have anymore information on it?
> 

I wouldn't be overly worried either, since most sysops will delete a user
that calls once and doesn't call back in over a year.  Chances are, the
FBI does *not* have your name and address.  At least not in connection 
with The Davy Jones' Locker BBS...

cb
-- 
 Cyberspace Buddha { Why are you looking for more knowledge when you  } /(o\
cb@wixer.cactus.org } do not pay attention to what you already know? {  \o)/
 Is this thing on? { Just say no to war, Bush, NSA, CIA, IRS, etc...  } fnord
From: Zhahai.Stewart@f93.n104.z1.fidonet.org (Zhahai Stewart)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Registered Keys - why the need?
Date: 10 Nov 92 22:49:46 GMT
Article-I.D.: puddle.18689.2B02FE9F
Organization: FidoNet node 1:104/93 - Adelante, Boulder CO


 MTP> Now, perhaps you believe Parade magazine and other constitutional 
 MTP> "scholars" that the militia is really the Army.  I suggest you 
 MTP> read the Constitution again.  The language used is very important.  
 MTP> Whenever the army or navy or other land forces are referenced, 
 MTP> they are NEVER referred to as the "militia."
 MTP> Please... actually READ the thing.

 For your exercise: in what other contexts is the "militia" referred to in
 the Constitution?  As a defender against a tyrannical government, or as a
 force against popular insurrection?  If you have yourself "actually READ
 the thing", with especial emphasis on this issue, the answer should be on
 the tip of your tongue.  If not, perhaps you have yet to win your spurs
 and the right to so chastise others.

 And what "other land forces" are you talking about?  The only other land
 forces I see mentioned are the "militia"!  Did YOU read it, or are you 
 making this up as you go? <g>

 PS: I have read not only the document, but analyses by pro-gun scholars.
 I found the latter surprisingly convincing; as a result, I think that
 waiting periods for handguns (by "liberals") are entirely constitutional, 
 in no way abridging the intent or letter of the amendment, but the banning 
 of "assault weapons" (by the Reagan and Bush administrations) are entirely 
 unconstitutional, being *exactly* the type of weapons referred to as "arms" 
 by the Constitution.  In the long run, conservative authoritarians are many 
 times more dangerous to the second amendment than are liberals.  The second 
 amendment will continue to lose grounds until it is detached from other 
 political agendas, like liberal bashing, and returned to its roots.
    ~z~

 (I can't believe I bothered to write on this subject here; MY issues this
 year are privacy and intellectual property).


--  
uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!104!93!Zhahai.Stewart
Internet: Zhahai.Stewart@f93.n104.z1.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: "robert seely" <robert.seely@canrem.com>
Subject: getting there
Reply-To: "robert seely" <robert.seely@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: comp
Date: 8 Nov 92 16:00:09 EST

To: rmb@eff.org

Hi Regina, I don't want to become a nussiance <g>, just wanted to let ya
know that I'm still working on a feed and also wanted to make sure you
got the info on my board that I sent. I posted a msg. to Chris asking to
be put on his list but have not seen anything as of yet.
I know that publication dates for the EFFector vary somewhat but was
hoping you could give me an Idea of when/how often to start looking.

Thanks Again
                                        R.S. 1558:09 11-08-92 (-300 GMT)
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
From: russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto)
Subject: Re: right to have .plan
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 02:27:27 GMT
Organization: Project GLUE, University of Maryland, College Park

In article <8661@lee.SEAS.UCLA.EDU> ygoland@edison.seas.ucla.edu (The Jester) writes:
>A question was raised regarding the inclusion of biblical material
>in a .plan. It was generally agreeded that the person who found this
>offense should go "whistle up a rope". 
>
>But I would propose another scenerio for examination:A professor at
>a major university teachers a class where all of the students have
>class accounts and hence access to finger. He tells those students
>the information regarding the timing of tests and hints on homework
>are available at all times just by fingering him (i.e. he put the
>info in his plan file). However the professor also included in his
>.plan file biblical and other quotes. Should he have to take them
>out? She he be forced to use another means to inform the students of
>the pertinant information?
>
>The issue is the difference between when you CHOOSE to read a .plan
>and when you HAVE to read a .plan.
>
>In the real world many of my professors give their office hours and
>such through their .plan. Its convienent.

This situation seems about equivalent to putting bible quotes in a
syllabus-- it's inappropriate and unethical.  But I don't think it is
a problem for the computer administration, any more than a printed syllabus
with biblical quotes would be a problem for the campus print shop.
The students should take it up with the professor's academic
superiors.

-- 
Matthew T. Russotto	russotto@eng.umd.edu	russotto@wam.umd.edu
Some news readers expect "Disclaimer:" here.
Just say NO to police searches and seizures.  Make them use force.
(not responsible for bodily harm resulting from following above advice)
Xref: sparky comp.org.eff.talk:6860 misc.int-property:1410 alt.suit.att-bsdi:606 comp.unix.bsd:8612
From: brnstnd@nyu.edu (D. J. Bernstein)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,misc.int-property,alt.suit.att-bsdi,comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: Patents:  What they are.  What they aren't.  Other factors.
Date: 8 Nov 92 19:10:45 GMT
Organization: IR

In article <1992Nov5.074758.29460@netcom.com> mcgregor@netcom.com (Scott Mcgregor) writes:
> The RSA patent doesn't prevent ALL applications of multiplications of
> large primes, only the application to cryptology, a narrower domain.

``A mathematical algorithm is not made statutory by `attempting to limit
the use of the formula to a particular technological environment.'
_Diehr_, 450 U.S. at 191, 209 USPQ at 10.''

Source: USPTO Official Gazette, September 5, 1989, page 8.

> Failure to appreciate this difference seems to lead some people

The U.S. Supreme Court does not ``appreciate this difference.''

---Dan
From: danodom@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Dan Odom)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: FBI Raids
Date: 12 Nov 1992 19:58:13 -0600
Organization: Kansas State University
Distribution: inet
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

cb@wixer.cactus.org (Cyberspace Buddha) writes:

>I wouldn't be overly worried either, since most sysops will delete a user
>that calls once and doesn't call back in over a year.  Chances are, the
>FBI does *not* have your name and address.  At least not in connection 
>with The Davy Jones' Locker BBS...

Well, they've got it now.  He's posted, he's addmitted he was on, they've
got it.  But I wouldn't worry; they aren't likely to harass a one-time
caller.  Very rarely do they go after ANY callers if they have the sysop
(or so I've heard).
-- 
Dan Odom
Kansas State University
danodom@matt.ksu.ksu.edu
Xref: sparky comp.org.eff.talk:6935 misc.int-property:1424 alt.suit.att-bsdi:611 comp.unix.bsd:8745
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: FBI Raids
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 18:22:52 GMT

In <1992Nov12.061426.26752@wixer.cactus.org> cb@wixer.cactus.org (Cyberspace Buddha) writes:

>Ronco.D.@f138.n101.z1.fidonet.org (Ronco D.) writes:
>>From: Dean.O'Donnell@f1389.n101.z1.fidonet.org
>> 
>>Included in the confiscation were records of everyone who'd ever called
>>the BBS.  Now, somewhere in the back of my mind I seem to remember calling 
>>Davy Jones' Locker a year or two ago, entering all the standard "new user" 
>>info (name, address, phone #), browsing around the message areas, seeing 
>>the $40 fee, and not bothering to ever call back.  ("Forty bucks to get 
>>on a BBS?  Right!" I seem to remember saying.)
>> 
>>But now I'm wondering-- I haven't heard or read anything further about
>>the case-- and somewhere the FBI has a record that I called a "pirate"
>>BBS, and they know my name and address.  
>> 
>>Now I'm not overly worried about this, but does anyone have any idea
>>what the FBI does with the info they get from a BBS raid?  Has anyone
>>else heard about this case, and do you have anymore information on it?
>> 

>I wouldn't be overly worried either, since most sysops will delete a user
>that calls once and doesn't call back in over a year.  Chances are, the
>FBI does *not* have your name and address.  At least not in connection 
>with The Davy Jones' Locker BBS...

Well, they didn't until you asked, anyway . . . ;-) ;-)
-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.