HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: eaeg231@orion.oac.uci.edu (Randy K. Tang)
Subject: Re: telnet site
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 1 Jan 93 05:12:30 GMT
Distribution: ca

In article <8996@lee.SEAS.UCLA.EDU> mlin@mott.seas.ucla.edu (Mark Y. Lin) writes:
>
>  Can anyone give me a telnet site in Orange County?
>   Maybe from CSULB or CSFulleton?
>   I am trying to do my home work here at home and
>   I don't awant to dial long distance.......
>   I have a modem and I am looking for a site where
>   I can telnet to my UCLA class acount......
>
>   I know this may not look too culture but I figured
>   it's a Chinese culturethat students help each other
>   out when it's free..... right?
>   thanks for any help.
> 

Hi:
Try UCI, one of UCLA's sister school? 
The numbers for 2400bd are 856-5661 and 856-5671. I think you either have to 
have an account or you'll have to know how to do SLIP, or, use your friend's
account like me.
Have a nice day.
Roger.



Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: ckshih@ne.nthu.edu.tw (Chun-Kuan Shih)
Subject: Re: Where to buy software in Taiwan (Was: How I post articles in Chinese)
Organization: National Tsing Hua University (HsinChu)
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 01:11:13 GMT

u235@rex.uokhsc.edu (Yung-Jin Lee) writes:
> In article <1992Dec28.190556.27266%huangyj@Uz.nthu.edu.tw> huangyj@Uz.nthu.edu.tw (Yeowell Huang) writes:
> >hhwu@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (eric.wu) writes:
> >> In article <1992Dec28.003226.20221%ckshih@ne.nthu.edu.tw> ckshih@ne.nthu.edu.tw (Chun-Kuan Shih) writes:
> >> >
> >> >      ET System is commercially available at about NT$1200 in Taiwan.
> >> >							^^^^^^
> >
> >NT$1200? (US$48)  or  NT$200? (US$8)
> >
> 
> 	Are you blind?
> 

       This is the price for personal copy, not of any special group
       discount.  It is a basic ET system (Flying Disk No. 5), which
       can be loaded in a 386 or 486 with DOS5.0 without taking any
       conventional RAM.  It also comes with an HP laser jet driver
       to print many variations of Chinese characters.  

       I am not a salesman, I am just telling the truth.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: haiying@cs.mcgill.ca (Haiying ZHANG)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: Taiwan vs Mainland To The Extreme
Date: 21 Dec 92 19:07:24 GMT
Organization: SOCS - McGill University, Montreal, Canada

In article <1992Dec18.044424.25387@u.washington.edu> seb@stein.u.washington.edu (-s e b a s t i a n-) writes:
>	<homeless language deleted> :) seb
>
>>I am ashamed of you, both you and your articals must come from a 
>>Pig's Shit!
>>y ou idiot narrow mind and... your mother must be fucked by pig.
>>
>>this is all I could answer you, fuck you!!!
>
>	no need to start this again, alright.
>	i guess u need to catch up your readings to SCT.
>	it's over, it's all said and done and all explained.
>	just read on your mails and shut the f*ck up. 
>	
>	a tasteless joke (maybe this belongs to alt.tasteless.jok :)
>
>	a girl said to a man, "f*ck you!"
>	the man replied, "thank you, girl!"
>	-------------------------------------------------------------
>	peace man. /seb@u.washington.edu

   You are one sick man, seb. For the sake of sanity of the net as a
whole and as a result of my current work load, I have refrained from
responding to your rabbit posts. Like you conceded yourself, the
opinion of the majority on the net is rather clear. Sneak out a posting
of your true color as above, thinking maybe nobody will notice, will
not help you to win the argument.


					Haiying
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: changhp@engin.umich.edu (Hsiou-Ping Chang)
Subject: Re: more than 50% support TI
Date: Fri, 01 Jan 93 02:11:18 EST
Organization: The University of Michigan
Reply-To: echang@engin.umich.edu
Originator: changhp@fijan.engin.umich.edu


In article <1993Jan1.050917.8974@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>, nlu@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu) writes:

> That's not my assumption.  My assumption is that China can use force when it
> finds the pretext to and finds itself strong enough to defeat Taiwan despite
> any possible foreign intervention and/or finds Taiwan without anyone to
> intervene for.  If Beijing finds foce feasible, it then will use force.
> 		   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
	That's a good assumption indeed.  Before Beijing find force feasible,
we should prepare for TI or we will never have a chance.  The pretext in and
of itself is irrelevant to the invasion.  (If Beijing is will to take military
action anyway, why should it need a pretext?  If it needs one, it can make one.)  

> >, CCP still waiving its fist against us.  However, TI can make CCP think twice
> 						    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >before it decides to ask unreasonable demands from us.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> This is where my objection is.  My contention is that it won't.  If Beijing
> finds itself strong enough and willing to take action against Taiwan, it will,
> whether if Taiwan declares independence or not.  In fact, if the above
> condition applies, TI will in fact make a perfect pretext for military action.
	
	A perfect pretext is irrelevant as explained above. 
Instead, CCP will weigh the advantages and disadvantages of taking military
actions against Taiwan.

If we make it clear that any military action will result in unanimous TI, and terminate the cooperation between Taiwan and China, we are maximizing CCP's costs
and minimizing CCP's benefits of its military action. (This applies to other 
diplomatic occasions.)  This is why we should keep both TI and unification options
alive and make good use of them.  And we have to prepare TI now before CCP become
too strong.

> (If Beijing is willing to take military action anyway, why should it care
> about what the people in Taiwan think?)
> 
	Agree.		

> 
> Well, I do support discussion of TI, as I wrote in another article, but I am
> not sure it is true.  Discussion of abortion rights, for example, hasn't
> eliminated the hostility between the pro-life and the pro-choice camps, for
> example, and the TI issue can be as divisive.  That doesn't mean that it
> shouldn't be discussed, though, since allowing it (and other issues) to be
> discussed is an essential element to the democratization of Taiwan.

	You could be right, but my personal experience in  SCT keeps me
thinking that it will help mutual understanding.   TI issue cannot be more divisive
as it is now.


	Hsiou-Ping
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: li@sicvax.enet.dec.com (Tom Li)
Subject: Re: more than 50% support TI
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 15:09:37 GMT


In article <1992Dec29.225422.19523@cbnews.cb.att.com>, liaohen@cbnews.cb.att.com (Heng-Hsin Liao) writes...
> 
>There is a bottom line by letting time decide what we will do - unification.

IMO, it is wise not to set the timetable for unification, independence or
status-quo. But our government should nurture people with these ideas so that 
people can well understand the issue and make a good choice. This will be the 
most important and the most difficult decision for people in Taiwan.

>What if China don't buy our effort toward mutual understanding eventually?

Then I would say "**** with CCP we go ahead for independence (or status-quo)".
Sometimes I think independence (or unification) itself is not really a bad 
thing at all, it is just like pro-choice and anti-abortion disputes. Neither
is absolute wrong or absolute right. The bad thing is that political motives 
behind the ideas. I feel these ideas have often been distorted by special 
interest groups to serve their political purposes. During the Chinese civil 
war, Chinese people turned their back and supported CCP. After 40 years it is 
clearly that CCP is much worse than KMT. We just have to be very careful with 
these special interest groups this time.

>Do you agree that one of the major obstacles against Taiwan's jumping
>levels higher is that we are still nobody to most of the important
>international organizations? There's not much we can do on it if
>we let time go by and probably attempt "something." 

Many people blame "One-China" policy has caused our isolation from the 
international community. I think "One-China" policy is not a real cause but CCP 
is. At present Taiwan has difficulty to be recognized as "Republic of 
ANYTHING". The fault is not the name of China, Taiwan, or Taipei but 
"Republic". Sometimes I naively wonder whether we can be more flexible to use 
just "Taiwan" to enter the international organizations - a geographical name 
which is less controversial and widely-recognized.

>If Taiwan have
>problem to jump to higher level, it is quite possible that we will
>be sandwiched by Japan and Guangdong/Fujian. You know what is going
>to happen to Taiwan at that time. Time is on the unification's side.

I wonder if those pro-unificationers are also worried their time is running 
out. As time goes, it is possible people in Taiwan feel less for unification. 
So time is not necessary in favor of unification.

Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: ckshih@ne.nthu.edu.tw (Chun-Kuan Shih)
Subject: Re: How I post articles in Chinese
Organization: National Tsing Hua University (HsinChu)
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 00:32:26 GMT

nhuang@cs.ulowell.edu (Bill Huang) writes:
> In article <1992Dec20.110835.3569@csie.nctu.edu.tw> chshan@csie.nctu.edu.tw (S. Shann()) writes:
> >    I've posted an article to suggest us should post articles in
> >Chinese, and I received many messages to ask me how to post in 
> >Chinese. That's the way I do:
> >
> >    1. Turn on the power switch of my PC
> >    2. Load ETen chinese system
>              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> i believe many people do not know what this system is, the most important
> question is : where can i get it? (commercial or shareware?)

      ET System is commercially available at about NT$1200 in Taiwan.

> 
> >    3. Login to host
> 
> so you have ethernet board on your pc, mm... ok, what about if i am using
> modem connection? then i have to use something on unix, any suggestion?
> 
> 

      I think you also need something like TELNET in Chinese version.
      Good luck.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: nlu@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re: Is TI so rossy?
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 05:46:39 GMT

In article <1993Jan4.044726.29075@zip.eecs.umich.edu> joy@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Chien-Chung Chen) writes:

>Do you mean CCP is just bluffing? So Taiwan won't be attacked by China?
>Or you are just fooling "stupid" Taiwanese?

No, he's just inheriting Gannedy Yaneyev's bold talks.  (If you still remember
Yaneyev, he was the vice president of the Soviet Union when the failed coup,
of which he was a party, happened.  A Soviet expert at the time said, "To
compare Gannedy Yaneyev to Dan Quayle is an insult to Dan Quayle.")

Just as Yaneyev boldly (well, his hands were shaking when he read those
documents, but...) announced that the reforms would be reversed and that the
Soviet Union would not fall apart, so now Mr. Shi is boldly announcing that
China would be conquering everyone when it becomes strong enough.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: huangs@ecf.toronto.edu (HUANG SUNG CHING)
Subject: Re: more than 50% support TI
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 11:16:23 GMT

In article <C07q4o.DEA@ulowell.ulowell.edu> cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi) writes:
>   4. U.S. never stopped trying to split Taiwan from China:
>        a. U.S. had law forbiten dual citizenship, but have so many 
>         dual citizenship Taiwanese. That reminds me how U.S. obtained Texas,
>          Hawaii, and sothen territories: send U.S. citizen there, encourage
>          them rebel against spainish or mexico, or Hawaii king' tyranny,
>          then delcare independent, the delcare joing U.S.
>          Does U.S. have same scheme for Taiwan? tell me.

     Not anymore.  U. S. allows dual citizenship now.

Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: cyc@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Yi-Chieh Chang)
Subject: Re:    HATE EACH OTHER ? TIME FOR TIAWAN INDEPENDENCE
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 19:12:59 GMT

>	   "Freedom" is a troublesome word. So, whatever attached to
>	   this word may cause trouble. The real problem is not 
>	   on freedom, but on the evil nature of man. With a little
>	   bit education, people can make a white thing look gray and make
>	   a black thing appear to be white. This can be called the
>	   side-effect of Freedom of Speech which is absolute the 
>	   creation of Devil.  
>

Tell us who can decide the gray, black, white, or even evil ?
When there is no 'freedom of speech', there sure won't have any 
gray, black, white, or even evil, because everything can be brainwashed as
perfect, such as the so called "heaven of communism".
There is no problem on 'freedom of speech', but the problem is people must
be educated to judge from gray, black, white, or evil, not to be told or
brainwashed to accept one idea.
So, don't think you are the only smart guy and the rest of people are all
fool, so only you can tell gray from white or black.
If, everybody are as smart as you are, who can fool people around by
telling black out of white ?
That's why democracy and freedom work best on developed countries, but may 
be as bad as dictatorship in underdeveloped countries, such as China and
Phillipine.

Yi-Chieh
From: laiichung@vtcc1.cc.vt.edu (L. D. ROPER)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: Election in Taiwan
Date: 23 Dec 92 19:43:00 GMT
Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <Bzozx7.Fyt@austin.ibm.com>, tylee@leety.austin.ibm.com (Ty Lee) writes...
>In article <BzovCK.5vs@news.iastate.edu> wwang@iastate.edu (Wen-Ping Wang) wri 
>No, I believe no soul in the world would burn itself without external
>forces. And, according to the newspaper I read, they were inflamed by 
>other people. 
> 
>I don't believe human being would have freedom of speech
>after death, except by the people who intended to exploit the de
\* Ty Lee                                                                    */

 Chen burned himself because KMT try to put him in jail by his publishment of
 Dr. Shu's "proposal of the constitution of R.O.T". Jen burned himself because
 he wanted to protest the incrimination of Chen by KMT and the right wing hard
 line fascists like you and the supression of freedom speech.

 Jen and Chen did this because they were forced by others, according to what
 you mean. Well, it's partly true. They were supressed by KMT and the right 
 wing radicals!

                                                             I Chung Lai
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: cyc@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Yi-Chieh Chang)
Subject: Re: World Journal
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 19:21:05 GMT

>China Times was also published in the US for a period of time.  Can 
>someone refresh my memory on how its owner got little Jiang mad at
>him and had to stop?
>

China Times was banned to publish in U.S. after the 1984 Olympic game,
because China Times reported lots of China athlete's achievement and gave 
then high praises, in the mean time Taiwan's athletes are totally
trashed. BTW, before China Times was banned, Nobody (almost) read WJ.
China Times is the best newspaper (most neutral) in Taiwan.
I never liked WJ, just like People's daily, boring.

Yi-Chieh 
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: chshan@csie.nctu.edu.tw (S. Shann())
Subject: Reference About Reading Chinese 1
Organization: Computer Science & Information Engin., Chiao-Tung U, Taiwan, ROC
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 03:47:22 GMT

This guide is originally posted in the group 'csie.chinese.talk' by
system administartor of computer center of CSIE, NCTU. I re-post it 
here under the allowance of the author.

Dear users :

  Now everybody can POST and READ NetNews in Chinese !
  
  There are three ways to access Chinese NetNews :
  
  1) In Workstations, you can run "cxterm" under X11/R5 environment, and then
     you can read and post news of yourself !
     
  2) In your own network PC, you can use a modified NCSA telnet --- ncutel.exe, 
     which you can get from anonymous FTP of csie.nctu.edu.tw, running under
     ETEN chinese system, to READ and POST your news article ! But because
     Chinese words are 8-bit character, you must type "stty pass8" before
     you want to input Chinese words !
     
  3) You also can post news directly through the PCs in out CC's PC room ! 
  
  
  Welcome to the Chinese age !
  <any problems or suggestions, please mail to help@csie.nctu.edu.tw>
--
Cheng, Shiao-Yang			       |     Sincerely Yours
Dep. Computer Science & Information Engin.     |       
National Chiao Tung University		       | sycheng@csie.nctu.edu.tw
Taiwan, Republic of China		       | sycheng@csunix.csie.nctu.edu.tw



Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: nlu@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re: Election in Taiwan
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 23:12:52 GMT

In article <BzLqrn.Gwr@ulowell.ulowell.edu> cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi) writes:

>The danger is that the U.S. is behind all the TI deal. And DDP might
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>concel it's real intention until seizing power on the issue of TI.

Please cite evidence, or otherwise your paranoia is not going to convince
anyone.

The United States supports democracy (or at least it says so); that is why
it supported (but again, only lip service, IMO) Lithuanian independence, for
example, because that is the will of the people.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: tsen+@cs.cmu.edu (Chung Kang Tsen)
Subject: applying graduate school
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 22:55:16 GMT
From: huangz@topaz.ucq.edu.au
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Is TI so rossy?
Date: 2 Jan 93 23:32:29 AET
Organization: University of Central Queensland, Australia

	The only solution to Taiwan issue is China becoming strong enough 
to be able to control Taiwan by force in short time, despite possible foreign
power's limited intervence. (I don't know exactly how powerful Chinese military
is, maybe the solution is already there.)  
	By then, Taiwan might choose independence and recognized by a generous
Chinese government, might choose unification with mainland, might choose war
in which it was defeated quickly. In one word, I hope a not so painful 
solution.
	Worst thing was the possible war lasted several years, or several
decades. Yes, even 60% taiwanese could supported TI, but still there were 
40% against it, and surely there would be some percent of people were 
determinded to fight to death to protect ROC. DDP might have to adopt KMT's 
methods in 50's-70's to control Taiwan, and could be more -- the KMT's 
rulling way in 30's-40's when it was in mainland. The Green Island would 
be fullfilled with political prisons and POW again.  
	It is not a funny game! look at history of China, it usually takes
several decades to restore order and law after big society change. Lood at
Yugoslavia and Bosnia, look at former Soviet Union, look at Korea, look at
Germany, look at North Ireland, and look at ourselves(if someone don't like
this word, take it as Taiwan and Chinese mainland), how painful is to be 
seperated into hostile entities! It is time to work out how to unify, but not 
how to seperate further. It may be a long and painful process, but won't be 
longer and more painful than an endless civil war.
	(It is funny to notice some netter talking about Taiwan's democracy 
as if Taiwan is a grand master of it. In your eyes, Taiwan has been enjoying
democracy for 43 years; in my eyes, 5 years; in a western's eyes, 1 month
only!!! You are still a baby, don't try to show off your mulstle.)       

Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: sosc1069@wc08.yorku.ca (Ming He)
Subject: Re: RMB's value.--Re: The depreciation of RMB
Organization: /writer/sosc/sosc1069/.organization
	<ljc1ssINNnss@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 21:15:40 GMT

### "SL" == Steven Lin <stlin@stevelin.Eng.Sun.COM> writes:

SL> The money is in your pocket. If people insist that RMB has its market value,
SL> don't cry when it is badly depreciated. It was 1:5.6 in September, now it
SL> is 1:7.X based on the lattest information. It is CCP's policy to depreciated
SL> the RMB so that the trade will be promoted faster.

If there are trade barriers like CMFN, the advantage gained from
currency depreciation will disappear.

-- ming
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: joy@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Chien-Chung Chen)
Subject: Re: more than 50% support TI
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 05:33:08 GMT

In article <C03IGE.rA@ulowell.ulowell.edu> cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi) writes:
>In article <1992Dec30.211918.3032@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> li@sicvax.enet.dec.com (Tom Li) writes:
>>Certainly anything is possible, I never say we should not prepare for a 
>>possible war but we have to take cost versus benefit into account. 
>How much can you prepare? If there is going to be War across the Straight, it
>will not be a little one. For China side, Westen intervention should be
>considered. It will not be a civil War, it is going to be another battle
>between East and West civilization. The force in Taiwan itself will not play
>a major role in the future military confrontation, at least China will think
>that Way. 

Another battle between East and West civilization? Don't you think you
stretch your imagination a little bit too wild? If Taiwan's people don't
want the war, no Western country can talk us into one. If Taiwan's people
decide to seek independence, it's by our own decision, not by others'.
Why should Taiwan Independence have anything to do with Wetern Imperialism?
Why is people's will so unimportant in your mind? Too much influence from
CCP's education?

>You know, We mainlanders are no longer Confusious_moralist_whimpy_monks. Past
>history of China taught us not to have any illusions in dealing with the
>West.

Another fist-waving argument from you again. I think Confucious' moralism
has been flushed down the toilet in your mind. Dr. Sun said Chinese is a
peace-loving people. Don't act like a counter-example, OK?

-- Chien-Chung Chen
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.china
From: seb@stein.u.washington.edu (-s e b a s t i a n-)
Subject: Re: Taiwan vs Mainland To The Extreme
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 03:38:25 GMT

>Hello, dude. I guess you got strange logic here. In one of your previous
>postings, you said
>
>        "if u don't care then why don't u just f*ck off, gees."
>
>Now, you say
>
>        "i don't care your comments...gosh. get off my back, sucker."
>
>You see? In your logic, if people don't care, people should "f*ck off",
>and when you don't care, people should get off your back and become a
>"sucker". Both you and your opponents "don't care", but this something
>"off" always belongs to your opponents.
>
>Shouldn't you be more consistent in your logic, seb?

	yes, yes, i should more carefuly the next time, thank you :) seb

Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan