HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: schuyler@acf9.nyu.edu (Gabriel M. Schuyler)
Subject: Re: You gonna pay for it?? (was Re: Open Access Computing NOW)
Organization: New York University
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 00:45:21 GMT

jp@tygra.Michigan.COM (John Palmer) writes:

>In article <9212120733.AA03282@cmcl2.NYU.EDU> schuyler@acf9.nyu.edu (Gabriel M. Schuyler) writes:
>>Basically, I believe that access to the internet is an information resource
>>like any other (e.g. the library) and that the University should allow
>>access to the internet to all students without question.

>What, so you can go and FTP dirty pictures and violate copyright laws.

>Look - I'm tired of hearing all the whining from people who think that
>they have some sort of RIGHT to access USENET/NSFNET/etc from their 
>college machines.
>   o - For classwork
>   o - For e-mail and news related to the above

> Oh - and no MUDing and FTPing accross the NSFNet - you arent an
>authorized user under the Acceptable Use policy. 
> 
> Sorry for the flame, but being on the providing end of this deal,
>you get a different perspective.

>Clinton/Gore in '92   | E-MAIL: jp@michigan.com  CAT-TALK IS BACK as a FREE
>PUTTING PEOPLE FIRST  | SYSTEM!! 313-882-2209 300-14400 V.32/V.32BIS/TurboPEP
>bye-bye Georgie....   | Anon-UUCP: System: tygra, Login: nuucp, no pw
>Its been a bitch...   | Get file "/cat/pub/filelist" for a list of files.

Well then, if it costs six-thousand to set-up and just over one-thousand to
keep the account open, why does it cost about $30 to set-up and $15 a 
month for most commercial services?  (Commercial INTERNET services)

I'd like to point out as well that BOTH of our attitudes are a little wrong,
since you think that all students want to do is chat and play MUD and
FTP to a site in Hong Kong.  At the request of the net, I limit FTP to
off hours, and I don't use MUD systems.

What I do is, I use the net as an informational resource.  I used comments 
from the alt.cyberpunk newsgroup to help me get ideas for a project for a
class.  This is what the net is good for and I don't see why it should be
limited only to people who are "doing research."

I also find it oddly hypocritical that your signature contains an add for
a free bulletin board system.  Who's paying for it?  Don't you think the
users should?  Or is someone <gasp> allowing access for general good of
the public?

-Gabe
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: john@iastate.edu (John Hascall)
Subject: Re: You gonna pay for it?? (was Re: Open Access Computing NOW)
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 23:12:18 GMT

jp@tygra.Michigan.COM (John Palmer) writes:
}schuyler@acf9.nyu.edu (Gabriel M. Schuyler) writes:
}>Basically, I believe that access to the internet is an information resource
}>like any other (e.g. the library) and that the University should allow
}>access to the internet to all students without question.

}...I'm tired of hearing all the whining from people who think that they have
}some sort of RIGHT to access USENET/NSFNET/etc from their college machines.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

}Look buster, those machines cost hundreds of thousands of dollars and
}are not like the library. They are there for specific research. ...

}Now, its ENTIRLY up to your school if they want to let you read/post news
}on those machines or if they let you FTP and play MUD. You HAVE NO
}INTRINSIC RIGHT TO IT!!!

Really?  Perhaps this is the case in your little backwater.

The facilities provided by Universities and Colleges varies widely,
as does the who/how/when/what of access.  If this is important to
you, then this is something you should consider in choosing a school
(this is also how you will get the attention of Administrators --
through their pocketbooks).

Computing facilities *are* akin to library facilities (I really doubt
you have a specific intrinsic or contractual right to use either).
In fact, not so long ago, most libraries did not allow (undergrad)
students into the stacks (starting to sound familiar?).


(shameless plug for ISU -- open UNIX and VMS and MVS access for all students)
(and probably open AS/400 access too if we could find any takers...  ;-)

pooh.cc> iwho
Total hosts: 603  Valid hosts: 587  Total Users: 320

Username TTY      Login at  Idle     Machine                  From host
john     ttyp0    Sat 16:30 00:37    pooh.cc.iastate.edu      :0.0
john     ttyq1    Sat 16:41 00:01    pooh.cc.iastate.edu      xts1cb:S.1
john     ttyq2    Sat 17:01 00:00    pooh.cc.iastate.edu      xts1cb:S.2


John
-- 
John Hascall                   ``An ill-chosen word is the fool's messenger.''
Systems Software Engineer
Project Vincent
Iowa State University Computation Center  +  Ames, IA  50011  +  515/294-9551
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,soc.college
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [Daily Illini] "Campus rules also questioned."
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 02:58:04 GMT

My campus newspaper had an article about our Student Code. The
articles starts:

>Campus rules also questioned.
>People who find fault with the discipline system also say the campus rules
>that the system enforces are unfair. Among the criticisms is that the campus
>conduct code is too vague. To critics, the code is just another example
>of how the discipline system appears to be out to get students.

If you have gopher, you can access the whole article with

gopher -p1/UI/DI/1992/December/8 harpoon.cso.uiuc.edu 70
And select for "Campus rules also questioned."

- Carl



-- 
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent any organization; this is just me.
 = kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,news.admin.policy
From: greeny@eff.org (J S Greenfield)
Subject: Re: [news.admin.policy]  Re: Jim Bowery's offensive posting
Originator: greeny@eff.org
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 19:14:30 GMT

John Stanley writes:

>>CAF-News has had several articles about how much news admin should
>>enforce the charters of unmoderated newsgroup. I'm enclosing
>>references to those articles.
>
>Who is CAF-News, and who put them in a position of authority over all
>news admins? I.e., who cares what CAF-News thinks news admins should be
>doing?

CAF-news is just selected (and digestified) articles from CAF-talk
(alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk).  It has absolutely no authority over
anybody.  The articles may simply contain information and opinions
on various issues.


jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:

>Carl's appointed himself world-wide guardian of politically correct free
>speech.  Best way to handle it is to simply put him in your kill file.

Last time I checked, Carl hadn't appointed himself anything.  He also
hadn't adopted any policy of supporting solely "politically correct"
speech.

Feel free to place him in your kill file, however, if you so desire.  Nobody
would think of *forcing* you to listen to him.


jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:

>Much as I hate to admit it, John has a point. ("There is no idea so good you
>cannot find a fool supporting it." -- Larry Niven) Carl, the site in question
>is _not_ an academic site, and so academic freedom does not apply.

So don't use "academic freedom."  Use the basic principle of free speech.


>Further,
>your position in favor of completely unrestrictred free speech is not
>representative of anything outside the academic community, and is
>controversial even there.

Please provide us with references supporting your claim that Carl favors
"completely unrestricted free speech."

While I don't doubt that many people do not support free speech to the
extent that Carl does, I have certainly *never* seen him express
support for "completely unrestricted free speech."


>Who appointed you guardian of academic freedom,
>anyway?

I was not aware that one now needs an appointment in order to express
one's opinion.


>And another thing: Is there anyone else out there who finds Carl's practice of
>including voluminous references in _every_ article he posts as annoying as
>Hasan B Mutlu/Serdar Argic's similar practice?

Does your keyboard have an 'n' key?

Some people are interested in references to further information.  (But
one notable exception are those who like to throw around unsubstantiated
claims in their own posts.)


-- 
J. S. Greenfield                                         greeny@top.cis.syr.edu
(I like to put 'greeny' here,                            greeny@eff.org 
but my d*mn system wants a 
*real* name!)                        "What's the difference between an orange?"
From: grjost@uts.amdahl.com (Garrett Jost)
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.org.eff.talk,comp.security.misc,alt.privacy
Subject: Re: CERT and the Dept. of Justice on keystroke monitoring
Date: 12 Dec 92 08:57:08 GMT
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

oleg@gd.cs.csufresno.edu writes:

>In article <q50qgdg@dixie.com> jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:
>>strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:
>>
>>>The notion that people should be warned about monitoring, when it
>>>is done legally, is a fundamental civil liberties notion. It is
>>>in the same class as "fair warnings" of many other kinds.
>>
>>Damn straight.  If Jerk-eeee doesn't want his keystrokes monitored, his
>>option is to own his own machine.  If he is a guest on someone else's machine
>>or is on his employer's or institution's machine, he plays by their
>>rules or does not play.  Nothing difficult to understand about that.
>>

>Huh? If I work for company X, X automatically has full rights to read
>my mail or search my home? Or maybe only if it officially warns me
>about this on it's front entrance? :). 

Maybe his e-mail, but not his home.  John was saying that anything that
you use that is owned by your company may be monitored by them.  Hey, my
company did not say when I hired in that I can e-mail all my friends and
expect 100% privacy.  It's their computers: they can do what they want,
and if I don't like it, then I don't use their machines!

They also have the right to search my office, since it's actually theirs!
But they don't have the right to search my apartment: it's mine.

Some of you guys treat your computer access given to you as if it was 
guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.  Wake up guys: it's not!

Personally, I would feel uneasy about using a computer that was always
monitored.  But then again, I could always not use it.  And if it worried
me enough, I would find another job.

-- 
Garrett

"These are my opinions and do not necessarily represent the opinions of my
employer."
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.org.eff.talk,comp.security.misc,alt.privacy
From: jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond)
Subject: Re: CERT and the Dept. of Justice on keystroke monitoring
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 09:05:02 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.

bear@tigger.cs.Colorado.EDU (Bear Giles) writes:

>Likewise, if I pay for computer access I expect the sysop to stay out of
>my files and processes unless I give explicit permission, provided I stay
>within my own directory tree and public spaces (e.g., /tmp), etc.  (Obviously,
>if I try changing files in /bin the sysop has a legitimate need to ask what
>I'm doing).

It makes no difference at all what you "expect".  What matters is what
you agree to in your contract.  If the apartment owner you mentioned
wanted access to your apartment anytime he wanted, you can either
comply or rent elsewhere.  

>"Property rights" are not as clear-cut as you assume.  The owner of a
>computer system, like an apartment complex owner, has the right to ensure
>that the physical system is protected but the data on it, like the contents
>of the apartements in a complex, belong to the individuals who have leased
>the use of the resources.

Property rights ARE as clear-cut as I assert.  All the current craziness
in the law has done is make me rewrite my subscription contract to reserve 
all possible rights.  In other words, I'm stating what should be obvious.
If I decide that in order to use my system, you must stand on your head
while administering oral sex to a camel, you will either do that or
you will go elsewhere.  

>BTW, the University of Colorado requires a "computing fee" be paid by the
>students, so the students are directly paying for the use of such resources;
>it isn't simply provided out of the philanthropy.

I'll bet you pay, oh, maybe a few percentage of what it costs to offer
you that service.  Spurrious to the issue.  What kind of contract
did you sign in order to get your access?  Those are the rules you live
by.

John
-- 
John De Armond, WD4OQC               |Interested in high performance mobility?  
Performance Engineering Magazine(TM) | Interested in high tech and computers? 
Marietta, Ga                         | Send ur snail-mail address to 
jgd@dixie.com                        | perform@dixie.com for a free sample mag
Need Usenet public Access in Atlanta?  Write Me for info on Dixie.com.
Xref: sparky alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk:3785 comp.org.eff.talk:7737 comp.security.misc:2307 alt.privacy:2671
From: jem@sunSITE.unc.edu (Jonathan Magid)
Subject: Re: CERT and the Dept. of Justice on keystroke monitoring
Organization: University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 02:42:40 GMT

In article <15DEC199207440917@dstl86.gsfc.nasa.gov> olson@dstl86.gsfc.nasa.gov (Paul Olson) writes:
>
>Let's face it, drugs make you stupid.
>When you're stupid, you forget safety precautions, no matter what job you have.
>

lets face it: giant mutant sigs make you make sweeping generalizing statements.
Amiga checkmarks only double the danger.  Just say no.

jem.

>       __  Paul J. Olson - VAX Systems Manager & Resident Amiga Addict 
>  C=  ///  Voice -     301/286-4246, 301725-5501                       
> __  ///   DECnet-    DSTL86::OLSON                                    
> \\\///    Internet - olson@dstl86.gsfc.nasa.gov                       
>  \XX/     Disclaimer: Statements in my messages are wholely my own.   
>  AMIGA    "[the universe originated] as a quantum fluctuation         
>            of absolutely nothing." - Guth & Steinhardt                    


-- 
Jonathan Magid     jem@sunSITE.unc.edu       sunSITE Administrator
Virtual pizza Delivery (tm)::faxed in 30 cycles or less or you get it
----------------------------------------FREE!!!-----------------------
Xref: sparky alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk:3748 comp.org.eff.talk:7661 comp.security.misc:2242 alt.privacy:2628
From: unruh@physics.ubc.ca (William Unruh)
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.org.eff.talk,comp.security.misc,alt.privacy
Subject: Re: CERT and the Dept. of Justice on keystroke monitoring
Date: 14 Dec 1992 23:03:40 GMT
Organization: The University of British Columbia
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: physics.ubc.ca

newsham@wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu (Timothy Newsham) writes:

>this is what he speaks about.. boycotting people like you
>and people like CERT who impose fascist rules upon
>others.

I'm sure he won't mind you boycotting him especially if it stops you
from using his computer equipment.

Xref: sparky alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk:3817 comp.org.eff.talk:7822 comp.security.misc:2345 alt.privacy:2707
From: escheire@sunlab.cit.cornell.edu (Eric Scheirer)
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
Subject: Re: Request or order? [was Re: I've just been repremanded...]
Date: 15 Dec 92 08:37:26 GMT
Organization: EFF mail-news gateway
Originator: daemon@eff.org


Note on prosecution due to "the reasonable request of a University official":

The Cornell Code of Conduct contains such a clause.  I'll quote it here.

> A. To refuse to comply with any lawful order of a clearly identifiable
>         University official acting in the performance of his or her duties in
>         the enforcement of University policy.

However, I think the key clause here is "in the enforcement of University 
policy".  I interpret this to say that if there's no official policy in place
censuring whatever it is being done, the order may be ignored.

Also, note that the CCC has "lawful order" in place of "reasonable request".
I think this is as it should be; reasonable requests are far too wide-
ranging to be handled by policy. 

I don't have any particular problem with this policy.  From what I'm seeing,
other schools' should be more like this one.

----
Eric Scheirer - Sun Undergrad Lab Consultant - escheire@sunlab.cit.cornell.edu

Any opinions expressed above are mine alone, and are not intended to 
represent views of the Cornell CS Dept, or Cornell Information Technologies --
I don't even work for CIT!
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.org.eff.talk,comp.security.misc,alt.privacy
From: bear@tigger.cs.Colorado.EDU (Bear Giles)
Subject: Re: CERT and the Dept. of Justice on keystroke monitoring
Organization: National Oceanic & Atmospheric Adminstration / Boulder Labs
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 20:12:36 GMT

In article <15DEC199207440917@dstl86.gsfc.nasa.gov> olson@dstl86.gsfc.nasa.gov (Paul Olson) writes:
>In article <1992Dec15.002556.28396@colorado.edu>, bear@tigger.cs.Colorado.EDU (Bear Giles) writes...
>>[stuff deleted]
>>will have a harder time making such a blanket rule.  (How would the
>>presence of barely-perceptable THC in the cashier at the local
>>McDonalds affect public safety?)
>>[stuff deleted]
>
>Gee, maybe the person comes to work a bit stoned, doesn't wash his/her hands
>after using the restroom and touches your food (the cashiers do set up your
>fries and Coke).  You eat the food contract typhoid.  Don't believe it?  It
>happened out here a couple of years ago.  Let's face it, drugs make you stupid.
>When you're stupid, you forget safety precautions, no matter what job you have.

There is a world of difference between showing up at work stoned and
having attended a party several weeks earlier with friends.  (Or, with
a sensitive test, having gone to the "wrong" concert several days earlier
where you did _not_ smoke a joint; you simply breathed).

Nobody has a problem with testing employees given reasonable grounds
to suspect immediate drug use may have contributed to public a risk --
that's why the first thing transportation professionals do after an
accident is piss in a jar, give blood samples, whatever.

However, why should I have to keep track of everything I eat and drink
for the past month?  Eat at McDonalds and a sensitive drug test may pick
up opium metabolites (from the sesame seeds on the bun).  Have a cold;
don't use OTC medicine because the codine in some preparations will look
like a narcotic as well....

Toss in the false positive rate (I think it's around 2-5% for a well-run
test, much higher at Drug-Tests-R-Us) and mandatory drug-testing _without
cause_ is nothing but a tool for intimidation.


BTW, part of the answer to your problem is to liberalize sick-leave.
I remember working a Disney World while in college; during orientation
we were told to take sick-leave if we were ill, rather than spreading
our cold to thousands of people.

Sounds great... then they didn't give part-time workers sick-leave or
vacation.  (I worked 16 hours most of the year, 40 hours during the
summer, Christmas break and Spring break, so I was put in a _lot_ of
time there).  If I was sick, I lost money, so I went to work sick.

I expect the same thing happens at fast-food places -- of course nobody
should go to work if they're sick, but if you can't pay your rent if
you don't work it puts the low-level employees in a quandry.

-- 
Bear Giles
bear@fsl.noaa.gov/cs.colorado.edu
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.org.eff.talk,comp.security.misc,alt.privacy
From: jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond)
Subject: Re: CERT and the Dept. of Justice on keystroke monitoring
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 23:00:16 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.

newsham@wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu (Timothy Newsham) writes:

>its nice to have a fin standing up for our rights, all the americans
>have grown accustom to all the attacks on our rights..

The fin knows nothing of what he speaks. There is no "rights" issue
involved here except property rights.  That is, the property I own
and provide to my employees to use is to be used in accordance with
my rules.  Period.  if my employees don't like the rules, they can
work elsewhere or buy their own equipment with THEIR money.

John
-- 
John De Armond, WD4OQC               |Interested in high performance mobility?  
Performance Engineering Magazine(TM) | Interested in high tech and computers? 
Marietta, Ga                         | Send ur snail-mail address to 
jgd@dixie.com                        | perform@dixie.com for a free sample mag
Need Usenet public Access in Atlanta?  Write Me for info on Dixie.com.
Xref: sparky alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk:3751 comp.org.eff.talk:7665 comp.security.misc:2246 alt.privacy:2632 alt.society.civil-liberty:6901
From: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.org.eff.talk,comp.security.misc,alt.privacy,alt.society.civil-liberty
Subject: Re: CERT and the Dept. of Justice on keystroke monitoring
Date: 14 Dec 92 21:28:26 GMT
Reply-To: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland

In article <Bz6Gq2.2ro@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us>, mju@mudos (Marc Unangst) writes:
>In the U.S., the ECPA makes it illegal for the system administrator to
>read others' e-mail if the users had a reasonable expectation of privacy.  In
>fact, the ECPA makes it illegal for *anyone* to read the e-mail if the
>users had a reasonable expectation of privacy.  I would venture to say
>that the users have a reasonable expectation of privacy on most
>existing e-mail systems without specific notices to the contrary.

So, basically, are Dept. of Justice (and CERT) just saying to all
federal computer admins: "Oops, we forgot to add to the law that of
course the government can monitor all traffic ECPA or not - as a
temporary fix put this in your motd and there will be no problems from
monitoring.  We're working on the Digital Telephony bill to resolve
this once and for all."?

//Jyrki
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.org.eff.talk,comp.security.misc,alt.privacy