HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: viswanm@jasper.CS.ORST.EDU (Mahesh Viswanathan)
Newsgroups: alt.toolkits.xview
Subject: Is XView worth it?
Date: 9 Nov 92 22:13:38 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Department, Oregon State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: jasper.cs.orst.edu

Hi,

I am just getting started on XView, and wanted to know:

	Is learning XView worth it?
	
On first glance, it seems simpler than Motif. However, from the
quick perusal that I did on this newsgroup, it seems that
the future of XView itself is questionable. Since XView
applications seem to run under Motif, could XView be used
as a quick way of writing applications?


Also, is XView saleable? I see several job offers for X/Motif
programmers, but not so many for XView experienced programmers.
This is of importance to me since I must (oh woe) look for a
job once I graduate........

All comments/replies/etc/etc are welcome.......

Thanks.

Mahesh

-- 
	Mahesh Viswanathan		|	viswanm@research.cs.orst.edu
	279B SE Lilly			|	(503)-752-0779
	Corvallis OR 97333		|
Newsgroups: alt.toolkits.xview
From: ted@usasoc.soc.mil (Ted Nolan)
Subject: owplaces?
Summary: Where is it?
Organization: SRI International, Ft. Bragg NC
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 16:28:47 GMT

Hello folks,

I'm putting the xview3 distribution together with X11R5 for some of our Sun3s.
It's going pretty well, except for being able to save the users workspaces.
When they try to do that, olwm tries to run the command "owplaces", which
does not seem to be included in the distribution.  Does anyone know where a
copy is, or an alternate method for saving the workspace?

			
				Thanks,

				Ted Nolan
				ted@usasoc.soc.mil
Newsgroups: alt.toolkits.xview,comp.windows.open-look,comp.windows.x
From: pwyoung@sandbox.hampshire.edu (Peter Young)
Subject: probs with PANEL_LIST item
Organization: Hampshire College, Amherst, MA
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 21:42:03 GMT

when I try to access the value PANEL_LIST_FIRST_SELECTED,
or PANEL_VALUE via xv_get on an exclusive PANEL_LIST, I get
the following error messages, respectively:

XView warning: bad attribute, attr # 0x555f0a20

XView warning: bad attribute, PANEL_VALUE

how do I get the index of the selected item in an 
*exclusive* PANEL_LIST_ITEM?

my code looks something like this:

i = (int)xv_get( panelItem, 
                 PANEL_LIST_FIRST_SELECTED 
                 /* or PANEL_VALUE*/);

strcpy( string, (char *)xv_get( panelItem, 
                                PANEL_LIST_STRING, 
                                i) );
    
Newsgroups: alt.war
From: parasite@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca (Leslie Mills)
Subject: Re: Women in Combat
Organization: University of New Brunswick
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 12:41:57 GMT

In article <1992Nov13.31911.10883@ms.uky.edu> randy@ms.uky.edu (Randy Appleton) writes:
>(stuff deleted)
>
>Never the less, the military was integrated.  First there were
>all-black units, and finally the races were mixed within units.  And
>the military is doing fine.  Of course there are some problems with
>racism, but no reasonable person suggests that we should re-segragate.
>
>(more stuff deleted)

Just a side note: In WWII the Nazis took advantage of the fact that the
Americans put all the Afro-Americans in separate regiments.  The would
bombard the black units with notes like "You're dying to keep the white
guys in power!" while at the same time bombard the white units with 
messages like "While you're over here, the ni***rs are stealing your 
job, your girlfriend, and your country."

I got this from the book "Behind Enemy Lines".  It was mainly a collection
of Allied and Axis (mainly Axis) propaganda.  If you've ever had doubts 
about the Nazi use of the Big Lie, I suggest you browse through this book.

-- 
Leslie Mills

If you love something, set it free.  If it doesn't come back to you,
Hunt it down and kill it -- Thus sayeth a T-shirt
Newsgroups: alt.war
From: jhan@descartes.uwaterloo.ca (JHan)
Subject: Re: Powered Body Armor
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 16:14:17 GMT

This is more Science Fiction than alt.war or Sci.military, but what you're describing sounds like the MI Power Suits from Starship Troopers (By Robert Heinlein)

(I recommend the book- it's a very good read.)
Newsgroups: alt.war
From: dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis)
Subject: alt.war sucks
Organization: Columbia University, Dept. of Biological Sciences.
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 20:43:55 GMT


   I don't have the stats handy, but the latest readership report for
news shows that alt.war is decreasing in popularity. I place the blame fr
this on sci.military.  It seems to me that they are letting in much more
non-technical articles than they used to. So perhaps there is less need
for alt.war.
   But since I created alt.war, and I still think it is a useful group,
I will try to stimulate some discussion that is clearly out of sci.mil
charter.

DanZ

-- 
This article is for entertainment purposes only. Any facts, opinions,
narratives or ideas contained herein are not necessarily true, and do
not necessarily represent the views of any particular person.  

Newsgroups: alt.war
From: rao@moose.cccs.umn.edu (Rao Akella)
Subject: Re: alt.war sucks
Keywords: No it doesn't.
Reply-To: rao@moose.cccs.umn.edu
Organization: Colon Cancer Control Study, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 01:51:29 GMT


In article <1992Nov11.204355.8867@news.columbia.edu>, dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis) writes:
> 
>    I don't have the stats handy, but the latest readership report for
> news shows that alt.war is decreasing in popularity.

Don't be disheartened -- every single newsgroup that's created starts off
strong and then slowly drops off until it eventually reaches its steady state. 
It's just part of growing pains.

> I place the blame for
> this on sci.military.  It seems to me that they are letting in much more
> non-technical articles than they used to.

I don't think this is a logical conclusion -- sci.military existed long before
alt.war was created.  I do admit that both newsgroups have overlapping
charters.

> So perhaps there is less need
> for alt.war.

Let it be.  We need an unmoderated alternative to sci.military anyway.

-- Rao Akella    <rao@moose.cccs.umn.edu, rao%moose@umnacvx.bitnet>
From: Charles.K.Scott@dartmouth.edu (Charles K. Scott)
Newsgroups: alt.war
Subject: Re: Pornography and war
Date: 12 Nov 92 15:36:44 GMT
 <1992Nov11.204936.9023@news.columbia.edu>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a5@newshost.dartmouth.edu

In article <1992Nov11.204936.9023@news.columbia.edu>
dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis) writes:

> A few years ago, I read an interesting article in a student publication
> here at CU that stated that prior to sending soldiers to fight in a foriegn
> country, the US army showed them porn movies featuring women of the
> particular ethnic group involved. The point was supposedly to stimulate a
> desire in the soldiers to kill the man and rape the women; and so make them
> more fierce.

I've done extensive reading on the subject of military science and
haven't yet come across anything of this nature.  Sounds apocryphal to
me.

Corky Scott
Newsgroups: alt.war
From: randy@ms.uky.edu (Randy Appleton)
Subject: Re: Women in Combat
    <1992Nov11.205408.9168@news.columbia.edu>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 23:06:42 GMT
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences

dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis) writes:


>    Recently there has been much talk of women and thier role in combat
>here in the US.
>    I am wondering how many examples there are in modern times of women
>fighting in regular or near-regular units. I know that there were female
>pilots used by the USSR in WWII.

>    What other examples are there?

The Israeli army back during the foundation of Israel is another
example.  Also the Russians used women in many combat roles, not just
as pilots.

Several months ago I saw the air force Chief of Staff tell congress
that he would rather *reduce* the effectiveness of the air force
rather than allow women in combat.

Last week a special commission decided that women should *not* be let
in combat in the U.S. military, except for certain non-submarie ships.
In particular, not on aircraft, even though it is held that women's
bodies are *better* at high-g activity than men.  Also, one quote from
a dissenter from the commission said that the commission realyy wanted
no change at all, but felt politicaly thatsome change is needed.  The
navy was picked as punishment becuase of the recient 'tailhook' scandal.

-The world is a sick place
-Randy

Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Minor Technical Concern about History
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 08:04:04 GMT

jturner@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu (Jeffrey Turner) writes:

] 	The "enemy" in Vietnam was not merely in the North.
] The Viet Cong were from the South and had strong popular
] support there.  US bombing only propelled more peasants
] into support of the VC (from The Pentagon Papers).


Uh, so the PT-76's from the NVA armoured support units that
over ran the SF sorces down the 'road' from Khe Sahn were
not REALLY NVA troops, they were merely VC in drag?

Fell free to read any of the NVA memoirs that have been
released since the end of the 'war' that explains what
happened after Tet.....

and that pleasant as the Illusion of the NLF may be,
it does not bear much weight after Tet.

ciao
drieux

ps: IT is a Free Country You know, they will NOT
arrest you in the USA and send you re_education centers
for reading 'Dangerous Elements' like Doan, and his
book 'The Vietnamese Gulag' - nor Giap's Memoirs....


-- 
Modern Day Problems:
Hickory, Dickory, Dock - Three Mice Ran up a Clock
The Clock Struct one, 
and the Other Two will be Upgraded In the Next Release.
From: dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska)
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
Subject: Re: Effects of US war protestors (was Re: Stockdale....)
Date: 11 Nov 92 18:38:01 GMT
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder CO

In article <1992Nov11.155332.8575@b8.b8.ingr.com> larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings) writes:
>In article <1992Nov10.205719.3543@vexcel.com>, dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska) writes:
>> In article <1992Nov10.173820.25529@b8.b8.ingr.com> larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings) writes:
>> >
>> >The news media before the shooting showed the destructive nature of the
>> >rioters, but after the deaths pprtrayed them as innocents.  Why you might
>> >ask?  Because it makes a better news story.  That's why.
>> >
>> Maybe its because some of the people shot were not involved in the protest.
>
>Yes, they were strolling along the street and decided "Why don't we just 
>walk through this rioting crowd?".  I DON"T THINK SO!!!

At that point, the crows was chanting and taunting the guard.  Yes -
people decided to walk through - or at least near the crowd.
>
>Or maybe the bullets bounced off the hard heads of the protesters, flew half a
>mile and hit innocent bystanders.  If you were in the crowd of rioters, you
>are just as guilty as the guy who broke the first window.  And how did they get shot if they weren't at the scene (ie. in the crowd). The shooting was into
>the crowd.

As you know, such protests were common.  While the shooting was into the
crowd, some bullets actually managed to get past the front-line protesters.
Unfortunately, the bullets didn't know this and just kept on going.

Furthermore, protesting - and even vandalizing - does not justify
shooting into a crowd.
>
>Larry Billings
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> 
>> 		dingo in boulder	(dean@vexcel.com)


-- 

		dingo in boulder	(dean@vexcel.com)
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: jarthur@bnr.ca (John Thompson)
Subject: Re: Effects of US war protestors (was Re: Stockdale....)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Richardson, Tx.
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1992 21:37:52 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.160101.24059@lgc.com> tuan@lgc.com (Tuan Nguyen) writes:
>
>Yes, I do.  Some Vietnamese just relish the destruction of their own country 
>-- and their countrymen -- at any costs to satisfy illusions of ideoligical
>beliefs.  In so doing, they fail to realize the strategy of the American war 
>planners in Washington to terrorize the Vietnamese populace in the countryside
>into withdrawing their support of the Vietcong.  The strategy, fortunately,
>did not work.  The Vietcong gained more support and were more convinced of
>their cause.  Unfortunately, the bombing and destruction of both North and
>South Vietnam continued.  The Americans only have their conscience to answer
>to.  The Vietnamese have to live with the consequences of such wholesale
>destruction for years to come.
>
>Tuan Nguyen
>

Could you, given two aerial photographs of the jungle, one taken before the
war and one taken yesterday, distinguish those areas which were bombed?  That
jungle was there long before North and South Vietnam and, unless they decide
to harvest it, will be there long after whatever passes for Vietnam today.
Our "wholesale destruction" by carpet-bombing in that jungle might have been
slightly more significant than the damage caused by the tunnels and under-
ground complexes, but I doubt it.

Could you, given two aerial photographs of Arlington National Cemetery, one
taken before the war and one taken yesterday, distinguish those areas filled
with American servicemen who died in Vietnam?  Were they all evil American
war planners, or is it possible that many of them were poor ignorant bastards
whose families had to live with the consequences of their being in the wrong
place at the wrong time?

Regardless of who was right or wrong, there were terrible consequences for
the people on both sides.  Only a complete asshole would imply otherwise.

"The strategy, fortunately, did not work."  Fortunately for whom?  You must
mean fortunately for all right-thinking people.  I commend you on your command
of the English language, you just need to brush up on your rhetoric.
From: drk@cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr)
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
Subject: Re: How to do the Art Noir Ad Hominiem
Date: 12 Nov 92 02:56:26 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Comp Sci, Urbana, IL

In article <1992Nov11.202306.7671@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux,
just drieux) writes:
>drk@cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr) writes:
>] >] To anyone reading Kim's postings, this admission should serve as a
>] >] warning signal regarding the accuracy and completeness of the
>] >] historical facts presented and the biases reflected in the
>] >] conclusions reached.
>] 
>] drieux .... has totally overlooked the fact that Kim has openly admitted
>] to an overwhelming anti-Communist bias, from which one can quite
>] reasonably infer that Kim's postings reflect this bias.  No _ad hominem_
>] here.
> 
>the point is that anyone who is AntiCommunist is clearly an invalid source
>of data.....

Once again, drieux has spent far more time preparing his/her/its typical
drivel (deliberately cross-posted to alt.flame, interestingly enough) than
actually attempting to comprehend the implications of my statement. 
Perhaps drieux ought to give those tired fingers a rest, and ponder the
qualitative difference between the adjectives "biased" and "invalid".

>] Perhaps drieux should spend more time attempting to comprehend postings
>] than sniping at them (with poor marksmanship in this case, I would add).
>
>we do NOT call it sniping if the target shoots themselves in the foot.....

And we can call it a "misfire" when the sniper shoots him/her/itself in the
foot, as in this case.
-- 
Dave Kohr     CS Graduate Student     Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Work: 3244 DCL, (217)333-6561  Home: (217)359-9350  E-mail: drk@cs.uiuc.edu
                   "One either has none or not enough."
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: drk@cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr)
Subject: Influence of protestors on US policy
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Comp Sci, Urbana, IL
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 22:16:34 GMT

In article <Bx9E3A.4p2@news.orst.edu> olsenm@ccmail.orst.edu (Monte Olsen)
writes:
>Yes, the burden of proof is on me [that protestors caused the US
>government to decide to withdraw from VN].  The proof is obvious: we're
>not there anymore. 

In other words, you have no evidence to this effect which you are willing
to present.

A basic principal of logic is that coincidence does not imply causation:
just because war protestors were calling for withdrawal does not imply that
this was the reason the government ultimately decided to withdraw.  You
will have to do much, much better than this to make your case.
-- 
Dave Kohr     CS Graduate Student     Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Work: 3244 DCL, (217)333-6561  Home: (217)359-9350  E-mail: drk@cs.uiuc.edu
                   "One either has none or not enough."
From: khong@CS.ColoState.EDU (tuan khong)
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
Subject: Re: Effects of US war protestors (was Re: Stockdale....)
Date: 10 Nov 92 02:01:37 GMT
Organization: Colorado State University, Computer Science Department

In article <BxBL6M.8ou@news.orst.edu> Monte Olsen <olsenm@ccmail.orst.edu> writes:
>In article
><JTURNER.92Nov6181803@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu>
>Jeffrey Turner, jturner@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu
>writes:
>>	50,000 American dead vs. 3 million Vietnamese dead.  And
>it
>>was US policy which contributed much more to the
>continuation of
>>the war.  When SV President Diem Bien Phu wanted American
>troops to
>>withdraw and to negotiate a settlement, the US backed the
>coup which
>>killed him.  So much for SV democracy.  That, along with
>everything
>>else SV had to be destroyed to be saved.
>>
>
>Let's see now, what did you say the name of the S
>Vietnamese president was? Diem Bien Phu? I think you're
>confusing that with the location of one of France's
>greatest military defeats. I won't tell you the name of
>the place--you'll actually have to do some work and look
>it up yourself. (That should be a novel experience.) As
>for the president's name, does the name Bo Dinh Diem ring
>a bell? Good, I knew you'd get it.
>
>I'll be at the moving wall this weekend thinking of you,
>Jeffrey. 
>
>Monte Olsen


What???  Bo Dinh Diem??? You are both confused! So put it to rest gents!
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: jturner@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu (Jeffrey Turner)
Subject: Re: North Vietnam
Organization: College of Engineering, Northeastern University
	<1992Oct31.035635.29186@emr1.emr.ca>
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 21:54:04 GMT

	The "enemy" in Vietnam was not merely in the North.
The Viet Cong were from the South and had strong popular
support there.  US bombing only propelled more peasants
into support of the VC (from The Pentagon Papers).
Even the president of SV (Diem Bien Phu) argued for withdrawal of
American troops and a negotiated peace until he was killed
in a US backed coup.

	There was no way to "win" the war.  US policy killed
3 million Vietnamese and 50,000 Americans in the futile effort.

			--Jeff Turner

For an excellent analysis see Noam Chomsky's writings, including
his article in the November issue of Z Magazine.
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: drk@cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr)
Subject: Re: Amusing Technical Aside
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Comp Sci, Urbana, IL
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 01:13:43 GMT

In article <1992Nov7.194627.23470@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux,
just drieux) writes:
>We Can Only Hope that David Kohr will take the time to read 'Vietnames
>Gulag' and notice the Big Difference between the Evil S.Vietnamese Police
>State where Dissidents could get Access to the 'LiberalMedia' and seek
>legal appeals.
>
>Unlike the Correct Thinking, Forward Looking, Progressive Policies of the
>Communists, who understood that Dissidents suffered from 'Mental Illness'
>and needed to be 'cured.'

We can only hope that "drieux, just drieux" will learn how to use the
<Shift> key in a competent manner; will realize that no one appreciates his
(her?) painfully futile attempts at satire and will therefore spare us the
repeated, failed efforts at sarcasm and stick to plain speech; and will at
long last reach the trivially obvious conclusion that merely pointing out
the civil and human rights abuses of one side in a conflict does not
constitute an endorsement of the policies of the other side.

>] Monte
>] (War mongering baby killer and village burner that I am)
>
>Technical Hit there Monte, the term is:
>
>WarMongerBabyKiller[tm]
>
>A wholely owned, Registered Trademark of
>
>WarMongersAreUs[tm] The Leading Edge Purveyors
>of DeathMerchants Inc. the world over.

This is precisely the level of humor which the term "sophomoric" was
invented to describe.
-- 
Dave Kohr     CS Graduate Student     Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Work: 3244 DCL, (217)333-6561  Home: (217)359-9350  E-mail: drk@cs.uiuc.edu
                   "One either has none or not enough."
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: bashford@scripps.edu (Don &)
Subject: Re: Effects of US war protestors (was Re: Stockdale....)
Organization: The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA, USA
	<92Nov5.230425est.47888@neat.cs.toronto.edu>
	<1992Nov6.160101.24059@lgc.com>
	<92Nov7.124526est.47991@neat.cs.toronto.edu>
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 00:32:56 GMT

>>>>> In article <92Nov7.124526est.47991@neat.cs.toronto.edu>, quoctp@cs.toronto.edu (Quoc Tuan Pham) writes:

Quoc> Do you know how much destruction is brought to the jungles in
Quoc> the Central part of the country by their policy of "New Economic
Quoc> Zones" and rampant loggings which cause floodings at a scale
Quoc> never seen before? The last two things have been occurring way
Quoc> after the end of the war and have much more devastating effects
Quoc> than the Americans and their bombs during the war were able to
Quoc> do.  In fact, the bomb shrapnels embedded in the trees have a
Quoc> positive benefits.  They are not so good to the saw blades in
Quoc> Thailand's logging mills.  Hardwoods from Vietnam jungles don't
Quoc> sell that well. The current commmunist government cannot
Quoc> benefits too much from cutting down and exporting hardwood
Quoc> trees.

Ah Ha!  We had to bomb the rain forest in order to save it!

I shall dash of a letter right now to President-elect Clinton
suggesting the B52 carpet bombing of the Olympic Pennensula
in Washington.

Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam,talk.politics
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Can we ReGroup This a Bit....
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 08:13:29 GMT

quoctp@cs.toronto.edu (Quoc Tuan Pham) writes:
] In article <1992Nov6.160101.24059@lgc.com> tuan@lgc.com (Tuan Nguyen) writes:
] >
] >Yes, I do.  Some Vietnamese just relish the destruction of their own country 
] >-- and their countrymen -- at any costs to satisfy illusions of ideoligical
] >beliefs.  
] >
] >Tuan Nguyen
] 
] If you refer to the communists and their ideology, I have no arguments.
] If the fight were only "illusion of ideological beliefs", why are you here
] in the US, a country with so much "evil intentions" toward Vietnam
] instead of staying back home to enjoy "freedom" and "independence"?
] 
] What HYPOCRISY!
] 

There's a "love it or leave it" line floating around
Yearning to be hurled.....



ciao
drieux


ps: But I am not sure which one of them is the 
WhiteMaleRacistGenocidalWarMongerBabyKiller
LapDogLackyOfTheMilitaryIndustrialComplex...


-- 
Modern Day Problems:
Hickory, Dickory, Dock - Three Mice Ran up a Clock
The Clock Struct one, 
and the Other Two will be Upgraded In the Next Release.
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam