HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rubio@HAN.Paramax.COM (Stuart Rubio)
Newsgroups: alt.society.futures
Subject: Re: Something different from the rest
Date: 9 Sep 92 03:56:48 GMT
Organization: ^
Originator: rubio@hpwisf1.han.paramax.com

In article <Bu7t6L.7E2@acsu.buffalo.edu> v187ef4y@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Patrick J Crowe) writes:
>>JAL137@psuvm.psu.edu () writes:
>> For instance "Star Trek" and the civilization it represented was one in which
>> humans suddenly became enlightened and rid themselves of sure nuclear threat.
>> 
>Evidently, this poster hasn't seen some of the episodes in the two series.  It
>is mentioned in these that there had been a massive war in our near future (but
>their past).  

Yes, as a matter of fact, they refer rather often in the first series
to a combination of high technology warfare and nuclear arms, brought
on by the development of genetically superior humanoids. The ambition
was not bred out as the superior traites were bred in. 

The Next Generation continues this concept of technologically advanced
techniques used by humans well into the 21st century.

Star Trek does not push a philosophy that we can not be destructive.
It only states the obvious, that we need not be destructive. 
The decision, after all, is our's.

>Further on, the poster states that a truly damaging nuclear war
>couldn't happen.  The major powers could be trusted not to fight each other in
>a big way, and any lesser power would be bombed back to the stone age.  However,
>a large-scale retaliation would send massive amounts of radioactive dust into 
>the air, raining fallout on the entire hemisphere.  Thus, such a retaliation
>would backfire.  It's still a dangerous world we live in.
>
>-Pat Crowe

The most frightening thing that I find in conversations like this one
is that most people have such a limited grasp of the topic, beyond
the stupidity of the popular News media, that they miss the obvious.
"Modern" political thought has now developed, thanks to, in part, the
great push of the "peace-at-any-price hopefuls" of the 1980s, to the
point that relatively clean nuclear wars have been seriously discussed.
This is a far more dangerous proposition than the 1980s scare tactics,
aimmed at the armchair warriors of American living rooms. Very serious
discussions of high tech-high altitude nuclear exchanges, combined with
more modern nuclear weapons, such as neutron weapons, are now believed
to be the "proper way" to wage such a conflict, particularly on a smaller
scale than a full strike. 

The most unfortunate thing is that, while those outside the real
discussions continue to point to horrific images of massive clouds
of fallout, the powers that be are moving beyond these limited
visions. 

Peace and long life,

Stuart
From: homer@korova.uucp (Homer The Brave)
Newsgroups: alt.society.futures
Subject: Re: Future Civilization advances
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 08:24:00 CDT
Organization: VHF void tube of the mind (713) 492-2783

jdr@starflight.Corp.Sun.COM (Jon Roland) sez:

>But the transition would have to be
>gradual and incremental, adding or changing a few things at a time, and 
allowing
>them to become a natural part of the living language.


You mean like it does now?

Get a dictionary from 1940 and look up the word 'byte'...

This whole global language idea seems to me to be off track. Certainly, 
its an interesting mental exercise to try and figure out how to make 
language in our own image, but I really don't see how that could help THE 
WHOLE WORLD. Industrialized countries, maybe; Somalia doesn't care what 
language you want them to speak.


--
              VHF void tube of the mind (713) 492-2783
        "where you can find the Zeta Greys SAFEWAYING themselves
                into the WONDERBREAD *heart* of America!"
Newsgroups: alt.society.futures
From: rwhitehead@cix.compulink.co.uk (Roger Whitehead)
Subject: Re: Future Civilization advances        
Cc: rwhitehead@cix.compulink.co.uk
Reply-To: rwhitehead@cix.compulink.co.uk
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 21:36:00 +0000

Sorry, Mary.  Didn't mean to sneer.

Yes, she can be spellbinding but I don't think she offers answers to real
problems.

Roger
Newsgroups: alt.society.futures
From: rwhitehead@cix.compulink.co.uk (Roger Whitehead)
Subject: Re: Something different from the rest   
Cc: rwhitehead@cix.compulink.co.uk
Reply-To: rwhitehead@cix.compulink.co.uk
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 20:55:00 +0000

You may be interested to know that in the episode of Star Trek shown on
British television tonight, Captain Kirk orders up a neutron bomb attack on a
(largely uninhabited) planet.

(This was the episode where Gary Lockwood and Sally whatsit from Mash get ESP
powers and a nice line in pale blue, twinkling contact lenses.  It must have
been an early one - Spock had bushy eyebrows and Scotty was a mere shadow of
his future self.)

Roger

Roger
From: mem@bnr.co.uk
Newsgroups: alt.society.futures
Subject: Global working
Date: 8 Sep 92 13:41:36 GMT
Reply-To: mem@bnr.co.uk ()
Distribution: alt
Organization: BNR Europe Limited, London Road, Harlow, Essex, GB


Have you had any experience with working with people at a site remote
to you? Do you telework? Do you have to communicate with colleagues in
a different continent? If so, I'd be interested to hear about the
triumphs and the woes. 

How did you communicate with your colleagues?  What kinds of systems
did you use e.g. phone, fax, groupware, etc?  What worked well and why? What
were the problems you encountered? What adaptations to your behaviour
did you have to make in order to cope with the remoteness of your
colleagues? How did the physical distance between you affect your
working practices? How were the social/managerial relationships in the
group affected? How did you feel about having to work with colleagues
you couldn't meet on a daily basis?

Please email your anecdotes, thoughts, etc. etc. on teleworking and
global communication to:

M.E.Morris@bnr.co.uk

Many thanks ... Michele



From: mem@bnr.co.uk ()
Newsgroups: comp.society.futures,alt.society.futures
Subject: Global working
Reply-To: mem@bnr.co.uk ()
Followup-To: 
Distribution: world
Organization: BNR Europe Limited, London Road, Harlow, Essex, GB

Have you had any experience with working with people at a site remote
to you? Do you telework? Do you have to communicate with colleagues in
a different continent? If so, I'd be interested to hear about the
triumphs and the woes. 

How did you communicate with your colleagues?  What kinds of systems
did you use e.g. phone, fax, groupware, etc?  What worked well and why? What
were the problems you encountered? What adaptations to your behaviour
did you have to make in order to cope with the remoteness of your
colleagues? How did the physical distance between you affect your
working practices? How were the social/managerial relationships in the
group affected? How did you feel about having to work with colleagues
you couldn't meet on a daily basis?

Please email your anecdotes, thoughts, etc. etc. on teleworking and
global communication to:

M.E.Morris@bnr.co.uk

Many thanks ... Michele



*************************************************************************
email: M.E.Morris@bnr.co.uk    phone: +44 279 429531   fax: +44 279 441551
BNR Europe Limited, London Road, Harlow, Essex, CM17 9NA, England.

        I think it's kind of interesting the way things get to be.
        The way the people work with their machines.
**************************************************************************
Newsgroups: alt.society.civil-liberties,soc.rights.human
From: khj@cray.com (Ken Jopp)
Subject: Re: Legalizing drugs
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: 10 Sep 92 10:13:09 CDT



The real problems for society do not involve the cost of the drug but the
effect on society. Drugs and alcohol are the primary causes of dysfunction
in families. Divorce, mate abuse, child abuse, loss of job and income are
the real crimes to society. In a real sense, we are losing people to
addiction. Healthy, productive people that support families and households
are being lost every day. The cost of this is much greater that of stolen
goods.
------------------------------------------------------------


The poster who submitted the above needs to review some basics of 
social science methodology.  You cannot assume a causation from a 
correllation.  If drug, including alcohol, abuse is correllated with
family dysfunction, it may be that the abuse causes the dysfunction,
or the dysfunction causes the abuse (a person in a dysfunctional 
family might turn to drugs, including alcohol, as anaesthesia to
escape the abrasiveness of the family), or both are caused by something
else (an irresponsible, or stupid, or mentally ill person might 
simultaneously abuse drugs, including alcohol, and neglect his/her
children, but neither the abuse nor the neglect will have CAUSED
the other).  


Newsgroups: alt.society.civil-liberties
From: poloughl@polisci.umn.edu (Paula O'Loughlin)
Subject: outing, arab-amer in gulf war
Keywords: outing, gulf war tolerance
Organization: Department of Political Science, University of Minnesota
Distribution: all
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 16:14:16 GMT

I'm teaching a course on civil liberties this fall and would like to talk 
about outing and the treatment of arab americans during the gulf war.  In 
order to do so, I need articles on both to assign to my students.  Does 
anyone have ideas.
From: bc151@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ken Fisler)
Newsgroups: alt.society.civil-liberties
Subject: List for the Discussion of the Presidential Campaign
Date: 12 Sep 92 08:17:04 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc4.ins.cwru.edu



I thought this might be of interest to some members of this
newsgroup:

There is now on Bitnet a list for the discussion of the '92
presidential campaign. Discussion is unmoderated and focusses
primarily on important, current campaign issues, though, like the
campaign itself, some discussion occasionally degrades to
spurious non-issues. Threads sometimes lead into critical
analyses of political history, the media, and campaign
strategies. Many members of this list post exerpts from books,
magazines, journals, newspapers, television reportage, and
academic studies as well as the full text of position papers and
speeches given by the candidates. A meaningful number of list
members understand the inherent union of theory and praxis and,
given the nature of the discussions, the flame level is very
tolerably and surprisingly low. If all you've heard and read thus
far hasn't parted the sea of sound bites, if you're looking for
information and analysis of current issues or have something to
give or express yourself, this may be a viable group to join.

To subscribe, send to: LISTSERV@MARIST (from a Bitnet address)
or LISTSERV@MARIST.BITNET (from and Internet address) the
message: SUB CLINTON <your first name> <your last name>


	Internet:	bc151@cleveland.freenet.edu
	Bitnet: 	bc151%cleveland.freenet.edu@cunyvm
	Audio:		Ken Fisler
Xref: sparky alt.society.civil-liberties:671 soc.rights.human:3394
From: gliesche@lonestar.utsa.edu (Jules D. Gliesche)
Newsgroups: alt.society.civil-liberties,soc.rights.human
Subject: Re: Legalizing drugs
Date: 10 Sep 92 18:47:56 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio

Folks,

I came in late on this discussion, so if I'm being repetitive just ignore
me...:-)

What I find interesting in this discussion is that the pro-prohibition
crowd makes it sound as though illegal drugs are more dangerous than they
really are.

According to the Surgeon General - 71% of drug related deaths are from
tobacco. 23% are alcohol related, and 5% are related to abuse of some
controlled (i.e. perscribed) substance. This leaves 1% for all the other
stuff.

Now since I'm the first to admit that statistics are flawed - let's say
that only three-fourths of of deaths, illness, and violent acts are
directly attributable to alcohol, tobacco, or perscribed pills? Wouldn't
it make more sense to go after those substances (or at least get rid of
federal tobacco subsidies) than going after the miniscule number of
"other" drug users?

As someone wisely pointed out - there is a great deal of hypocracy afoot
here. I seriously doubt that a Bush or Clinton regieme would really give
a damn about the victims of drug use or abuse - it's just that the
"War on Drugs" gives the government a good excuse to whittle away at
what's left of our constitutional protection from illegal search and
seizure, probable cause, and a host of other "technicalities" that
inhibit the formation of a police state.

I'm worried. We've already got a heavy dose of "national", and the
demopublicans are institution the "socialism" - does the combination
of these two words worry anyone besides me?

 _______________________________________________________
 |     "I love my country, but I fear my government"     |
 | Marrou / Lord '92 - VOTE LIBERTARIAN - 1-800-682-1776 |
From: homer@korova.uucp (Homer The Brave)
Newsgroups: alt.society.civil-liberties
Subject: The War On Drugs (so-called)
Date: 11 Sep 92 16:07:58 GMT
Organization: VHF void tube of the mind (713) 492-2783

Hmmm... This talk of prohibition vs legalization and the sham that is the 
war on drugs... I can't help but think of the curfew laws here in 
Houston, TX.

Houston has a crime problem. So some of the high-and-mighties around here 
got together and decided to put a curfew on 'children' 18 and under. 
Their reasoning: these kids are out committing crimes or are buying drugs 
or whatever. The real reason: it was an election year and if they passed 
the law the politicians could truthfully claim that they'd actually done 
something about that pesky crime problem.

After all, kids under 19 can't vote, so they're not REALLY constituents, 
their parents are probably glad that someone is giving them the rights to 
tell their kid to "...be back by midnight or the cops will GETCHA!" ...so 
politically its a win-win situation. Just remind yourself not to think 
about the kids who can't stay out past midnight....

The war on drugs? Its the same thing. Its easy for a politician to be on 
CSPAN ranting about how evil drugs are. It gives the APPEARANCE of 
motion, whether or not anything's actually moving. And the Pro-Drug 
people certainly are a vocal opposition, aren't they?

The War On Drugs(tm) is not an issue of morality. Its not about helping 
anyone (except the politicians)... Its not even (as some 
conspiracy-finders would say) a way to restrict our rights as citizens 
perpetrated by The Ones In Charge.. No, its a non-issue that has been 
raised to such a level that otherwise intelligent people will post 
thousands of messages a day on UseNet and other systems.

What Homer thinks should be done: Legalize pot. Cocaine and its relatives 
should remain illegal. Acid, MDMA, and other 'hard' psychoactives should 
be legal, but by prescription.

--
              VHF void tube of the mind (713) 492-2783
        "where you can find the Zeta Greys SAFEWAYING themselves
                into the WONDERBREAD *heart* of America!"
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
From: jennyg@titan.ucc.umass.edu (Jenny Gutbezahl)
Subject: Re: Boss Peeve
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 23:30:19 GMT

In article <1992Sep11.231340.29640@news.iastate.edu> z1dan@exnet.iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson) writes:
>jennyg@titan.ucc.umass.edu (Jenny Gutbezahl) writes:
>
>   [Stuff about my nipples deleted]
>
>	Posting a GIF would allow unbiased confirmation of your attractiveness
>claim, you know.  I'm sure there will be comments galore.  Booter so far has
>refused to substantiate her own claims in this area, but second-hand
>confirmation has been forthcoming.  Can anybody back up *your* claims?
>

Actually Dan, I made no claims to my overall attractiveness (which, in
any event, is beyond the bounds of your feeble imagination, as you lie
alone in bed, furtively groping for your solitary orgasm), but only stated
that my nipples are more attractive when erect.  Surely you don't need a 
.GIF to confirm that.

Jenny
-- 
***************************************************************************
jennyg@titan.ucc.umass.edu is    :  "It just feels right"
      Jenny Gutbezahl @          :    -the fine folks at Mazda
    Univ. of Mass, Amherst       :
From: parr@acs.ucalgary.ca (Charles Parr)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Re: on men
Keywords: giant toilet bowls, rump deformities
Date: 9 Sep 92 21:01:32 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

In article <1992Sep9.194913.21584@umbc3.umbc.edu> potler@umbc4.umbc.edu (Laura Potler (GSFC)) writes:
>obcuriosity: do you suppose that after years of wearing a wallet in
>	the same pocket, men's rumps start to deform to accomodate
>	the wallet?

Well, being posessed of a CuteTush(tm), I can at least partially
answer this question...If a man's butt is worth looking at, he 
ain't supposed to spoil the view with a wallet. Even the kind
that bulges with green stuff. 

So I am told, anyway. My lady-love always carries my wallet for
me. She even spends the money as well, which is downright
considerate, really.

Actually she doesn't, but it made for adequate peevery.

So there is yer answer, lp, the guys with worthy tushies don't
get dents in their butts...who cares about the rest anyway?

Regards, Charles
-- 
Within the span of the last few weeks I have heard elements of
separate threads which, in that they have been conjoined in time,
struck together to form a new chord within my hollow and echoing
gourd. --Unknown net.person
From: geoffm@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM (Geoff Miller)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Re: Boss Peeve
Date: 15 Sep 92 21:28:11 GMT
Followup-To: alt.peeves
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Menlo Park, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: purplehaze.corp.sun.com



In article <17612@autodesk.COM> booter@Autodesk.COM (Elaine Richards) writes:

>Peeve: Misspelling people's names. I apologize for spelling Jenny as
>Henny - "Hen" is certainly not the word I was thinking of, although
>Henny Youngman certainly would have something to say about this thread,
>like "Lady! Your sign fell down!"


		"Take my archetypes...please!"

				-- Henny Jungman


Geoff


-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
       "If you are a pro-lifer, then adopt an interracial mongoloid --

                                        -- OR SHUT THE FUCK UP!"
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
From: parr@acs.ucalgary.ca (Charles Parr)
Subject: Re: Boss Peeve
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 17:30:03 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

In article <192d5eINN6ur@bigboote.WPI.EDU> padutton@banzai.WPI.EDU (Peter Alan Dutton) writes:
>In article <92Sep14.140240.31202@acs.ucalgary.ca> parr@acs.ucalgary.ca (Charles Parr) writes:
>>In article <18tar1INNiu2@bigboote.WPI.EDU> padutton@wpi.WPI.EDU (Peter Alan Dutton) writes:

>>      A couple of words of advice, since you seem to need them
>>      (a) Do not annoy her
>
>What fun would that be?

        Depends, maybe she'll break out the whips and chains, and
        give you a potent reminder of just who wears the patent
        leather in the relationship? Would that be fun?

        Of course, maybe she's a Hitchcock fan, in which case
        you probably don't want to annoy her after all.

>>      (b) If you were to have a "furnace problem", you could then
>>          break out the blankets for some Comfy Couch Cuddling.
>>          Such behaviour *could* get you laid. Yes, even you.
>
>Well, when it's too hot, *I* get cranky. Of course, the person who is too
>hot always loses these arguments. It is much easier to put on another
>sweater or cuddle up with someone to get warmer than it is to do 
>anything to get cooler.

        The obvious corrolary is to turn up the heat and take off
        *your* clothes. As a peevster, you are expected to have
        the muscular physique and engorged ManTool(tm) of a
        Young.God.at.the.Dawn.of.the.World(tm), which should then
        make you irresistable. 
 
        What's that? Laughter from the peanut gallery? Oh for
        shame!
  
        There is a pun, which I will now make. Assuming that you
        are considering this warm vixen as a marriage partner.

        Ahem, "If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the
        hitchin'"

        Sorry.

>Oh, sure, I'll turn the heat down and she'll immediately go for the 
>megablankets, and then she'll want to cuddle, but once I get up to
>cook dinner or go to the bathroom, she'll run to the thermostat AND
>keep all the blankets on AND expect me to get back under the blankets.

        Shouldn't *she* be cooking dinner? (ooohh, I'm gonna get
        flamed for that one) Preferably barefoot (here it comes)

>>>But I digress. As for me, I'm much too hot right now. But my nipples
>>>don't do anything interesting anyway.
>>
>>      Oh now, Peter! You know that just isn't so! You have the
>>      cutest little titties! 
>
>**blush** Oh, Charles! (sound of batting eyelids)
>
>>      Oops, sorry Peter, guess it's out of the closet now, huh?
>
>So are all my blankets.

         Whoops, see you later, peevsters, I guess I'll be busy 
         for the next ten-15 minutes.

Regards, Charles
-- 
Within the span of the last few weeks I have heard elements of
separate threads which, in that they have been conjoined in time,
struck together to form a new chord within my hollow and echoing
gourd. --Unknown net.person
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
From: sheehey@access.digex.com (Jenni Sheehey)
Subject: Re: peevefest east 92 (v1.1/B, subsection F, mod 2)
Keywords: bats, speaking in tongues, walt disney, the ag building by the library, disk drives the size of washing machines, lots of blinking lights...
Organization: Me, !Inc., Fairfax, VA
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 00:13:23 GMT

parr@acs.ucalgary.ca (Charles Parr) writes:

>We will all, of course, carefully not comment on how Jenni was
>there, and Joy was not. How long must this charade go on?

Yeah, if we time it right, the next one can be in October, when I can 
dress up as a short person and pretend my Jenni persona is in Scotland.  =)

>We in peevton demand the truth!! Admit it, Jenni, Joy was only
>ever a twisted figment of your warped imagination.

Aaah, but relative old-timers will remember that Joy was here first, so
I must be the real figment.  

ObPeeve: I have no problem finding an ATM that will let me withdraw money
from my bank account in PA, but I have yet to find one that will let me
*deposit* any.  Does that mean I can keep taking money out without 
putting any back in?  that would definitely be a !peeve.
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
From: egpv29@castle.ed.ac.uk (JHenderson)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Re: Dreams (was: Holiday peeve)
Date: 14 Sep 92 15:29:27 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

In article <25817@castle.ed.ac.uk> fofp@castle.ed.ac.uk (M Holmes) writes:
=>dac@prolix.apana.org.au (Andrew Clayton) writes:
=>
=>>p.s. Micheal Moorcock sucks. [Does he still have anything to do
=>>with Hawkwind?]
=>
=>I guess this one's for me ;-)

Since you're an expert on things that suck, right?

=>Peeve: To-Read piles.

Don't complain to *us* about your piles, Holmes!

			(that's enough bitching at Mike.........ed)

Peeve: People who steal your punchline. (That means you, Sam ;-)

-- 
=======Jeremy Henderson========egpv29@castle.ed.ac.uk===============
Q: How many user support people does it take to change a light bulb?
A: We have an exact copy of the light bulb here and it seems to be
   working fine.  Can you tell me what kind of system you have?