HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mme@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mann Me)
Subject: Re: Computer-net in China
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 92 05:09:58 GMT

In article <1992Aug14.175616.19597@bradford.ac.uk> H.Wang@bradford.ac.uk (H WANG) writes:
>
>I tried to locate any internet-linked host in Beijing
>and the now I can gave 4 host names in China:
>
> ica.beijing.canet.cn. 
> math.tsinghua.cn.
> ica.beijing.canet.cn  *
> math.tsinghua.cn  *
>
>CND readers may find 'tsinghua','canet' familiar.
>However the last 2 hosts ( have '*' with them) have 
>their address unavailable therefore cannot be entered.
>Further more, all the 4 hosts 'probably not 
>directly connected to the Internet', experts  
>had indicated. 
>
>There are several domains with .cn in their names:
>
>        beijing.canet.cn (unspecified)
>        canet.cn (unspecified)
>        tsinghua.cn (Tsinghua university, beijing, china)
>
>But when will them be entered from Internet remain unclear. 


Presently, to my knowledge, China is not on internet.  
Those are just FQDN which anyone can get by registering
with the NIC.  For a status of the network in China
perhaps a good read would be the Kahaner's Report
in comp.japan.research.  I beleive it is also archived
in cs.arizona.edu  and can be retrieve by anonymous ftp.


Me Han Mann
From: lix@BUCRSB.BU.EDU
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: Cannibalism in China
Date: 17 Aug 92 19:38:56 GMT

T.T.Wu wrote:
======================================
In article <etxmow.714043998@garboc34> etxmow@garboc34.ericsson.se (Mats Winberg) writes:
> (the lie cited by etxmow@garboc34.ericsson.se deleted)
Frankly, I heard this sort of thing when I was in China, but not exactly
like the article described.  It happened at later 50s' and early 60s',
just before I was born; so my knowledge is second hand.

This disaster was caused by CCP crazy "Big Leap" movement which brought
about man-made famine.  In order to keep them in power, CCP tried every
method to make sure PLA immuned from the famine and let city people suffered
to a point that they might complain but they would not rebel.  So CCP
took everything away from farmers, literally everything, in some cases
last grain was taken away.  So many farmers were forced to starve to death.
In some area unfortunately cannibalism occured.

This was most serious crime CCP committed to Chinese people, in my opinion.
Frankly, as a Chinese myself, I really don't understand why those farmer
didn't rebel, because they really had nothing to lose.  I always think
this is most ugly side of Chinese people, that is too submissive to the
authority.

However, I think this sort of thing has little to do with culture, instead
it has a lot to do with ugly side of human nature.  It occured in all kinds
of cultures.  For example, in Jewish gettoes at Third Reich time,  or in
Leningrad under Nazi German siege, cannibalism occured too because of extreme
lack of food.  I never think it has anything to do with Jewish Culture or
Russia Culture, thoug Nazi propaganda would say otherwise.
======================================

As one surviving the famine, I feel obligated to say that was simply a lie.
There was a famine from late 1959 to mid 1963. I know a village where half
of the population were starved to death. However, there was no such thing
as cannibalism happened in China in such period, to the best of my knowledge.

Some young friends may not understand why farmers did not rebel, so they
tend to accept the rumored cannibalism as truth.

The fact is: the Chinese overnment still managed to strictly control the
situation. How they could do that is another intersting question, but that
was a fact. No rebellion existed at that period. Period.

The Big Leap Forward and resulted famine is one of the most serious crime
of Lao Mao committed to Chinese people and nation. No problem about this,
but rumor about cannibalism is only an insult to those suffered.
Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Tuesday, 18 Aug 1992 23:02:52 EDT
From: <ZHAO@auvm.american.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject:    Looking for Chen YuLing (Fuzhou,UCLA)

I lost contact with my friend Chen YuLing, who was originally from Fuzhou and
come to U.S. in Sept,88 as a master student in the Department of Public
Health, UCLA. If anyone have her lately information, Please E-mail to me.

Thanks in advance.

                                     Sincerely
                                     Zhao, QingHua

Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: usenet@news.acns.nwu.edu (Usenet on news.acns)
Subject: Re: REPOST: PRE-MARITAL SEX IN CHINESE SOCITIES
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 18:41:14 GMT

In article <9208121634.AA19448@larry.optics.rochester.edu>  
ng@moe.optics.rochester.edu (Baldwin Ng) writes:
> Hello Everyone,
> 
> Me and my friend have been talking about the fact that there is a serious
> trend in many chinese societies around the world:
> 
> Pre-martical Sex is getting more & more common.
> 
> Just wonering what people from Hong Kong, Mainland China as well as Taiwan
> think about this issue.  Both os us are pretty traditional and conservative.
> So, we are against people to engage sex before marriage.
> 
> What I like you all to respond on are:
> 1) What you think is the trend now in HK, CHina and Taiwan
> 2) What can we do about it?
> 
> PLEASE DO NOT WASTE TIME REPLYING AND ARGUE ABOUT WHETHER IT'S ACCEPTABLE
> OR NOT.  WE ALL HAVE FREEDOM OF CHOICE!  I am just interested to see
> what exactly is happening these days!!  So, NO FLAMES!!! PLEASE.
> 
> Baldwin (ng@moe.optics.rochester.edu)


I don't know a lot about the situation in HK and Taiwan. But in mainland China,  
it is getting more and more acceptable, at least among college students. But  
although it is getting more and more accepatable, it does not mean that many  
people are having sex before marriage. There are several reasons:
 1) Many people don't object pre_marriage sex, but just dare not try    
    themselves.
 2) They don't have the opputunities and places to have sex before marriage. 
    Many young people live with their parents or in dorms where more than two  
    persons share a room.

We simply can't do anything about it. It's people's choice, as long as they are  
willing to take responsibility.

Carl
From: cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi)
Subject: what will bush say in the Convention?
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Lowell Computer Science
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 20:40:35 GMT

1. U.S. is the World largest economy.
   comment: US have GNP $5.3 trillion, but own foreign $2.5 trillion.
2. Good Eighties!
   comment: U.S. had net growth of $2 trillion but borrowed more than $2 
    trillion from foreigners during the period. 
3. "dream team" of hourly productivity!
   comment: from figure U.S. workers are 30% more pruductive than
    Japanese workers. But:
         U.S. have 5% more unemoployment rate than Japan. 5% discount!
         Japanese work six days, Americans work 5 days. >5% discount!
         U.S. is a matured economy, service section count more percentage
           (60%), while Japan was growing economy service section count
           around 50%. Service section do not produce actual good, though
           generating revenue. >10% discount!
         Illegal immigrates are not counted for number of workers, though they
           countributed to productivity.
         Injection of artificial money from outside U.S. inflated price of 
         all goods in U.S., in turn inflated productivity.
     I would not surprised if those factors were filtered out, U.S. would have
     much lower productivity, not only than that of Japanese, also than that of 
     Germen.
Just watch the comedy of Bush' acting, and have fun!
From: yufeng@cis.ksu.edu (Yufeng Li)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: Japs don't say SORRY to China?
Date: 13 Aug 1992 01:26:09 GMT
Organization: Kansas State University, Dept. of Computing and Information Sciences
NNTP-Posting-Host: depot.cis.ksu.edu

In article <gretchen.154@yap.las.uiuc.edu> gretchen@yap.las.uiuc.edu writes:
>In article <1992Aug8.120111.1@lure.latrobe.edu.au> bioysl@lure.latrobe.edu.au writes:
>
>>The Japanese emp. is likely visiting China this October, but will NOT express
>>apology about invading China in 1930's.  Can someone confirm this news.
>
>>If it is true, I think we should try to give some pressure to the Japs and ask
>>them to DI1 TOU2 REN4 ZUI4 and pay the compansations to our people.
>
>>Don't you think, guys?
>
>
>I think you are right!  Japanese emp. should express apology to Chinese for 
>the invasion in 1930's!
>
>We should let our voices be heard that we want his apologies.
>
> Speech Communication Department
> University of Illinois


 Yes. I agree. But it seems Chinese government thinks Japs is extremely
 important, not only in economy, but in friendship as well. I really
 wonder how much benifit China can get by flatterying Japs. By the way,
 what is the status of chinese non-official group for war compensation? 

 Yufeng Li
From: dickhoff@NERO.WUSTL.EDU
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: test
Date: 16 Aug 92 01:24:35 GMT


Sorry, please ignore.
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Friday, 21 Aug 1992 15:01:38 CDT
From: <U24211@uicvm.uic.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Test!!!!!!!!!!



1234567890
1234567890
From: tdh@vax5.cit.cornell.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: world economy in 1986
Date: 16 Aug 92 14:48:19 EDT
Distribution: soc
Organization: Cornell University

OS
In article <713791697.19408@minster.york.ac.uk>,
yong@minster.york.ac.uk writes: 
> The world economy in 1986 was as follows
> 
> 		GNP in $ billions	shares in global
> 
> USA		4,235 			25.4%
> EEC		3,626			21.7%
> Japan		1,966.2			11.8%
> Canada		354.8			2.1%
> China (PRC)	274.1			1.6%
> Australia	182.1			1.1%
From: cqu@ringer.cs.utsa.edu (Chang-ning Qu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: Golden Age of China?
Date: 21 Aug 92 03:44:50 GMT
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio

In article <1992Aug21.021809.3196@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu> you write:
>In article <1992Aug20.234802.859@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> cqu@ringer.cs.utsa.edu (Chang-ning Qu) writes:
>>
>>    Golden age for old people probably is hundreds or thousand years ago,
>>for young generation should today and tomorrow. Aged people like to recall
>>past, youngster prefer dreaming future.
>>
>>cqu
>
>Would like to say that the Golden age in China is from now to the
>future?
>
>Tingli Pan

 Sure, with the evolution of society, China definitely will be better 
at least in some times of the future than the golden age in her
history. I wonder what will we call then, Diamond, Diamond+,
or Diamond++ ?

cqu
From: tdh@vax5.cit.cornell.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: world economy in 1986
Date: 16 Aug 92 14:47:29 EDT
Distribution: soc
Organization: Cornell University

In article <713791697.19408@minster.york.ac.uk>,
yong@minster.york.ac.uk writes: 
> The world economy in 1986 was as follows
> 
> 		GNP in $ billions	shares in global
> 
> USA		4,235 			25.4%
> EEC		3,626			21.7%
> Japan		1,966.2			11.8%
> Canada		354.8			2.1%
> China (PRC)	274.1			1.6%
> Australia	182.1			1.1%

Don't be fooled by these numbers. They are based on monetary values of US
dollars. Think about industrial output, CHina is way better than its dollar        
demoninated GNP. Japan's Yen in the 1950s is more than 600.00 = $1.00. But now 
it is about 125.00= $1.00. Major industrial output in CHina is now ranked among 
the top three to five positions except some high-tech products. GNP based on  
international exchange is quite misleading. In analogy with Japan, China's
current GNP may be more than 3 times larger than its dollar demoninated
measure. Still it is a quite controversial issue in economics so don't take 
these numbers for granted. If you take these numbers for granted, you are sure
to be surprised as the Americans in this year's Olympics when China suddenly 
"comes of nowhere" and play a major role in international economy as it is now
in sports. My suggestion is to compare industrial and agricultural output,
trade figures instead of a single GNP measure.        Andy Gu




Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: echeng@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu (Eddie Cheng)
Subject: Re: Protection bill
Organization: The Ohio State University; Department of Phyiscs
Distribution: usa,soc
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 20:29:55 GMT

In article <1992Aug19.152136.14538@vax5.cit.cornell.edu> dhsy@vax5.cit.cornell.edu writes:
>
>  I guess it would be safe if it is predetermined that one can return to the
>US (using a student visa or a greencard), and it would not be safe (hence
>needs protection) if Mr.Zhu goes to China and stays.  That's the whole point
>for this "protection bill", isn't it?

	Nope, it is just your guess, not the point for that "protection"
bill.  Why would it have this (arbitrary) 90 day restriction otherwisely?  

	The whole point of the bill is that CSS will face prosecution once
they dare to step on the land of their own country.  That is what the
authors and other Congress people said on Capital Hill and also what the
CSS "representatives" said there and here too.

	Why the bill did forgive some "brief, innocent" trip to China is
however beyond me.  What is the big deal with the number 90 anyway?


    Eddie
From: yidao@cae.wisc.edu (Yidao Cai)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: Information needed on TAX issue
Keywords: tax
Date: 17 Aug 92 16:04:45 GMT
Organization: U of Wisconsin-Madison College of Engineering

In article <Bszvp6.G8x@acsu.buffalo.edu> v999rkjl@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu writes:
>Hi, netters:
>
>The foreign adviser here told me that all the RAs from P.R.China
>are liable to the fedral tax once their salaries for one calendar 
>year are higher than $5,000.
>But according to my understanding, for the students from P.R.China,
>their scholarship or assistantship (no matter R.A. or T.A.) are 
>exempted from fedral or state tax according to certain tax treaties 
>between Chinese and US governent. 
>
It depends on which code you cite.  You have to cite the correct one ( 20(c)? )
for full exemption.  A friend of mine used to claim $5000 exemption but this
year she claimed full exemption under 20(c), she got her money back.  She
is an TA.  Under the law of this state, TA is classified as a kind of job, as
indicated on the pay-check.  Since RA is considered a schorlarship, it is
absolutely safe to claim full exemption under the treaty.  For TA, if is 
defined as a job, then it may depend on your own/the particular IRS officer's
interpretation of the law.  As I was told by an advisor, everybody interprete
the law his own way, everybody is right, and everybody is worry. :
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: liang@cs.scarolina.edu (Da Dong Liang)
Subject: Re: NBC Live From Sheng Zheng Stock Market
Organization: USC  Department of Computer Science
Date: 12 Aug 92 19:35:16 GMT

jll@loki.cc.nd.edu (Junlei Li) writes:

>Last night, following the American Close Up in the NBC news, there was a brief
>report on the Stock Market in Sheng Zheng, China. The whole report was a series
>of scenes desbribing one of the opening days of the stock market. The whole
>report was not longer than fourty-five seconds.

Since I have no trust in NBC, I watched CNN which also provided a footage
about the incident at Shenzhen Stock Exchange.         

>At the begining of the scenes, you could see the countless "would-be-capitalist" gathering on a big square waiting in lines to get to the sale window. That 
>scene looked dramatically like the ones taken from Tiananmen Square during "6.4" in 1989. You would be shocked by the amount of people at the site.
>The second scene was that two Chinese police were trying to keep the line in 
>order. They pulled out a man, who probably tried to sneak into the line. One of the police hitted that man very hard on the shoulder by using a police stick.
>The third scene was quite like the second one. This time, one police pulled out another line-sneaker and gave him a big kick on the butt.

Surprisingly, all the cops carried no guns. They had only electric sticks.
Compared to the American cops, they are really lightly armed.  

>If you have missed the NBC News last night, you probably should try to find some way to see it. The scenes were worth seeing, at least I think so. 
>I am not smart enough to make any political comments on the report. 
>But to me, rather than an Upper-sign for China's Open Door policy, the rush in 
>the Sheng Zheng market LOOKs very much like the Rice Rush in Shanghai and 
>Chong Qing during the World War II.

Well, I don't see it that way. It reminded me of the 60's Hong Kong Stock 
Market. Capitalism will bring wealth but also some disorder. And it need
a long time for China to learn how to manage economy in a GOOD capitalist 
way which means a GOOD legal system and democracy.

I am glad that China finally has the courage to do the experiment of 
stock market. Some mutual funds in Wall Street are looking for some 
stocks in China Stock Market. Is that amazing?

I hope this incident won't be used by those conservatives as an excuse 
to shut down the market. Rather, better regulations should be made to
upgrade the stock-trading infrastructure.
From: jamesou@ZYGOTE.HSC.USC.EDU (James Ou)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: Protest :-) (Re: Parents)
Date: 13 Aug 92 19:35:41 GMT

lix@bucrsb.bu.edu wrote:

>James Ou wrote:
>  Yu4 Bao4 Zhi1 De2, (I would like to pay back the love I owe [them],)
>  Hao4 Tian1 Wang3 Ji2. (but the debt is like the vast sky which has no end.)

>The translation of the last verse is wrong in mood. Are you intentionally
>twisting it to fit your points?   Protest!!!:-)

To avoid confusion, here are the four words of the last verse:

Hao4: written with Ri4(sun) on the top and Tian1(sky) at the bottom.
      This character means "vast".

Tian1: sky.

Wang3: similar to "Wang3" of "net", but without "silk" (Mi4) radical.
       This character means "no".

Ji4: as in "Ji2 Duan1" (ultimate) or "Tai4 Ji2" (Tai-chi, a taoist symbol).
       It means "ultimate end".

So, "Hao4 Tian1 Wang3 Ji2" means "(Like) the vast sky which has no end".

So, what is the right "mood" for translating this verse? :-)


****Confucius said, "Jun1 Zi3 Bu2 Huan4 Ren2 Zhi1 Bu4 Ji3 Zhi1, Huan4
Bu4 Zhi1 Ren2 Ye3."
(A gentleman will not be worried about that he is not known to
other people, but will be worried about that there are people
with virtues that he does not know.)
From: tylee@austin.ibm.com (Ter-Yuan Lee)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: AM I REALLY A RACIST?
Date: 13 Aug 92 17:43:54 GMT
Organization: IBM Austin Advanced Workstation Division
Originator: tylee@leety.austin.ibm.com


In article <Aug.9.16.47.09.1992.18865@ruhets.rutgers.edu>, zzhang@ruhets.rutgers.edu (ZhiZhong Zhang) writes:
> what does IMHO stand for?

It is "IN MY HUMBLE OPINION".
-- 
/* ------------------------------------------------------------------------- *\
 * The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of IBM's.         *
 * Take care and have a nice day.                                            *
 * Ter-Yuan Lee                                                              *
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: chenzn@ucunix.san.uc.edu (Zhanzhan Chen)
Subject: test
Organization: Univ. of Cincinnati
Distribution: world 
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 92 04:00:23 GMT

this is a test.

Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: usenet@news.acns.nwu.edu (Usenet on news.acns)
Subject: Re: What about China done to Korea?
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 00:47:00 GMT

In article <1992Aug19.185806.18081@ms.uky.edu> gang@ms.uky.edu (Gang Li)  
writes:
> usenet@news.acns.nwu.edu (Usenet on news.acns) writes:
> 
> 
> >You are logically wrong. It's the governments who need to apologize. Since  
> >Chinese government has not apologized to the Korean people, why should we be  
so  
> Hi! Where is our Emperor, or his son. If their army did something wrong, then
> We killed them, OK? We did not ask this to other people. Why should we  
apology.
> What is the logic.
> 

Again your logic is wrong!! Assume your logic were correct, then you forget  
that today's Japan and its Emperor is not the same as before. 

Also, the old tradition of asking someone's son to pay his dad's debt has taken  
deep root in your heart. This is feudalism!

Carl
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: davidg@aegis.or.jp (Dave McLane)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.hongkong,soc.culture.japan,soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: An open letter to the Emperor Akihito of Japan
Date: 15 Aug 92 01:57:23 GMT
Followup-To: soc.culture.china
Organization: Aegis Society, Kyoto Japan

ntetsuya@lamar.ColoState.EDU (Nishimura) writes:

>	I hope and wish that the Japanese government will initiate these 
>	actions by themselves not because they are blamed and told to do so by
>	any other country.  Well, if they can do so ONLY after being blamed, 
>	it's just a shame...

I think the real problem might be that people don't want to accept that
the Japanese goverment has a long history of only giving in to "foreign
pressure". Perhaps things will be different this time, but I myself
wouldn't count on it. 

That is, the problem isn't with the Japanese goverment, it lies
elsewhere: What do you do when somebody doesn't do what you you
think they should after you have complained about it for 50 years? 
Continue to complain for another 50 years? 

IMHO, life is too short. But if somebody really wants to complain to
the Japanese government, why not do so instead of complaining here.
Or is somebody from the Japanese goverment monitoring s.c.j.? 

Dave

--
Dave McLane 
JUNET: davidg@aegis.or.jp (ONLY within Japan: post otherwise)
Nagaokakyoshi, Kyoto Japan Tel: +81-75-951-1168 Fax: +81-75-957-1087
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.hongkong,soc.culture.japan,soc.culture.taiwan
From: shin@krusty.ee.udel.edu (Jeong-Gyun Shin)
Subject: Re: Hows 'bout I make this apology thing reeeel simple for the closed minded?
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 16:10:55 GMT

In article <FELIX.92Aug17075457@crowfix.com> felix@crowfix.com (Felix Finch) writes:
>Aren't there more important ways to waste bandwidth than this stupid
>apology war WHERE IT DOESN'T DO ANY GOOD?  What is the point of
>running up my telephone bill JUST BECAUSE YOU FEEL SELF-RIGHTEOUS?
>Everyone has been a jackass at times (look at this very posting for
>proof).

As a matter of fact, stupidity is many times self evident.  I join
the question and demand to know who feels so self-righteous to demand 
an apology that doesn't do any good?  
Souls of nations, momentous cries of forefathers, eternal burden of 
clensing our own past ... what good does that do?  Everybody did that,
everybody does the same and tough luck you've been stepped on, but why 
Japan?
Because I want to be only myself without a shadow of self-righteousness
in my next reincarnation, because I don't want to be pillaged, mutilated, 
and raped again and again [strong symbolism intended] in my next 
reincarnation.  Because I don't want to be around next time somebody
comes up with a stupid scribling like this.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china