HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
Subject: Re: WELL anonymity policy
Originator: mnemonic@eff.org
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 00:38:21 GMT

In article <1ham10INNdi5@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> an127@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Korac MacArthur) writes:

>	My concern is the one that has been expressed about a general
>attitude by private systems that some seem to have.  I personally do not
>believe that anonymity is a bad thing, even if it leads to a few more
>colorful conversations than if full accountability were enforced.

This statement in itself suggests a misunderstanding about the WELL:
as users can attest, there is no shortage of "colorful conversations"
there.

>Given the recent
>passage of stalker laws, how soon will it be before having your real
>name and address (electronic) available to anyone who fingers a system
>will be considered a security threat? 

If your concern is stalkers, you should have no trouble getting anonymity
from WELL management. In the meantime, ask your system adminstrator to 
limit the information that finger displays.

>If you say these are the situations where the WELL would let
>someone have a "pseudonymous" account, well and good, but why should a
>subscriber have to wait to prove they need one?

Who said subscribers have to "prove" anything?


--Mike



-- 
Mike Godwin,    |"I'm waiting for the one-man revolution
mnemonic@eff.org| The only one that's coming."
(617) 864-0665  |                           
EFF, Cambridge  |                   --Robert Frost 
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: ae547@yfn.ysu.edu (Ronda Hauben)
Subject: Re: [misc.activism.progressive]  Clinton Office Requests Comments
Reply-To: ae547@yfn.ysu.edu (Ronda Hauben)
Organization: St. Elizabeth Hospital, Youngstown, OH
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 18:52:53 GMT


In a previous article, Barry.Kapke@f33.n125.z1.fidonet.org (Barry Kapke) says:

>Hello Chris!
>
>Monday December 21 1992 13:48, Chris Fedde wrote to All:
>
> CF> I take it from this post that our president elect's transition team
> CF> does not have an email address?
>
>Of course, they do.
>
>Jock Gill
>Public Access Email
>Office of the President-Elect
>75300.3115@compuserve.com
>
>The Clinton E-Mail Team was incredibly effective as a two-way feedback loop in the election campaign. Hopefully, the groundwork laid will expand and we can get email access to ALL government representatives. <grin>
>
>Ciao.
>Barry (1:125/33, 8:914/133, 88:881/172, 93:9050/0, 94:5100/1, 96:101/33)
>
>--  
>uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!125!33!Barry.Kapke
>Internet: Barry.Kapke@f33.n125.z1.fidonet.org

Is there any E-Mail address for Congress? I was told by Senator Paul
Simon's Office that The U.S. Congress has email communication 
internally among Congress but that the public is NOT ALLOWED to
have access to it.
I want to be able to send E-Mail to Simon's Office. Does anyone
know of any way to do so?
It seems archaic that there is no electronic access via email for
the public to the U.S. Congress. 
-- 
Ronda Hauben                    email address:ae547@yfn.ysu.edu
Amateur Computerist Newsletter              or
P.O. Box 4344                   rhauben@heartland.bradley.edu
Dearborn, MI 48126
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Prodigy summary, anyone?
From: john.asselin@grapevine.lrk.ar.us (John Asselin) 
Date: 19 Dec 92 10:57:00 GMT
Reply-To: john.asselin@grapevine.lrk.ar.us (John Asselin) 
Distribution: world
Organization: The GrapeVine BBS *** N. Little Rock, AR *** (501) 753-8121


JFW>Has anyone put together a review of Prodigy?

JFW>I am familiar with their policies of censoring bulletin board
   >discussions and restricting email, and even tried it out for a month
   >myself (for free, of course).  I want to be able to give a full response
   >to someone who is asking what they are about.

JFW>I just need an overview of all the complaints with them, and thought I'd
   >see if anyone else has done something like this so I don't need to do it
   >all myself ;-).

I think I'll pass on the review (I used prodigy for about a year. The
current football stats helped me a lot with fantasy football, but became
too expensive for that to be the only use).

I read an article by Penn and Teller (I don't remember where) about the
censorship of "profane" E-mail on the service. They suggested using your
spell checker on the "profane words." The new words would be easily
replaced by the reader.

John

---
 . QMPro 1.0 41-3424 . I may have already won $10 million.
 . SFMail Qwk v3.0
---
  SFUTI 3.16 . Abort, Retry, Fail?  19200  (402)292-8290
 * Abort, Retry, Fail? BBS! (402)292-8290 HST
 * PostLink(tm) v1.04  ABORTRETRY (#1053) : RelayNet(tm)
                                                                                                            
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [eff.mail.com-priv]  Internet, Muslim Brotherhood, Skull & Bones
Followup-To: comp.org.eff.talk,eff.mail.com-priv
Originator: kadie@eff.org
Organization: The Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 19:51:49 GMT

[A repost - Carl]

Newsgroups: eff.mail.com-priv
From: sac@well.sf.ca.us (Steve Cisler)
Subject:  Internet, Muslim Brotherhood, Skull & Bones
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 21:35:34 GMT

In the Dec. 26 Economist there is an article called "The Good Network
Guide" where various networks are rated (1-5) on
power, secrecy, organization, strength of beliefs, peculiarity of rituals,
and exclusivity.
Examples include Yale's Skull and Bones 3 1 4 0 2 2
Rhodes Scholarship: 5 2 5 3 1 5
Opus Dei 2 3 4 5 3 1
Muslim Brotherhood 4 4 4 4 4 2
Trilateral Commission 3 4 4 3 5 2
cand best of all
USENET and Internet 4 3 3 1 0 5
"In the future the best networks may be electroic, not personal,
and their models will be USENET and Internet" followed by a brief
history of both with a couple of errors: there are more than
'a few hundred newsgroups' on USENET and an exclusivity rating of
'5' may be true in Great Britain but certainly not here in the U.S.
cNo byline on this article.

Steve Cisler
Apple Library
sac@apple.com
-- 
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
 =kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: Caller ID suggestion
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Distribution: inet
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 05:02:11 GMT

strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:

>But I'd want to be
>sure my mother in Lower Siwash Falls, which still uses tin cans and
>string, can get through. In other words, it should require a call
>or line to take some affirmative action to be considered
>blocked, whether per call, or per line with per call unblocking.

No problem. All Caller ID systems that I've heard of distinish blocked
calls from out-of-area calls. Blocked calls typically display as "P",
for private. Out of area calls are marked differently (I don't
remember the usual code). I believe this is standard on all systems
that allow any kind of blocking (even when block-blocking is not
offered).

[...]
>I think most people on both sides of this issue would be happy with
>this approach, assuming it's readily feasible in the next year and
>isn't yet another stall by the blockers.
[...]

I've never heard of a pro-blocker objecting to blocking blocking. It
is the phone companies that object to it. I believe that object to it
because block-blocking reduces the value of caller-id to, for example,
Radio Shack.

- Carl
-- 
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent any organization; this is just me.
 = kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From: spp@zabriskie.berkeley.edu (Steve Pope)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: WELL anonymity policy
Date: 28 Dec 1992 22:56:02 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley -- ERL
Distribution: inet
NNTP-Posting-Host: zion.berkeley.edu

In article <8260@news.duke.edu> jfw@neuro.duke.edu (John F. Whitehead) writes:
>In article <1hb7v9INNm74@agate.berkeley.edu> spp@zabriskie.berkeley.edu 
>	(Steve Pope) writes:

>>(Other disadvantages I am told are a low limit on disk filespace, 
>>and a slow connection out to the Internet, but those topics 
>>are not germane to this newsgroup.)
>
>These perceptions are not true.  [..]

>And the Internet connection really is not slow.  For connecting from the
>Well in San Francisco to my system here in North Carolina, I got figures
>that are basically the same as vice versa:
>
>	well% /usr/etc/ping neuro.duke.edu 10
>	PING neuro.duke.edu: 56 data bytes 10 packets     
>	...
>	10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0% packet loss
>	round-trip (ms)  min/avg/max = 130/143/190
>
>and when I did the same thing from my machine here to the Well, I got
>
>	neuro> ping -s well.sf.ca.us 56 10
>	PING well.sf.ca.us: 56 data bytes
>	...
>	10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0% packet loss
>	round-trip (ms)  min/avg/max = 133/157/227

John, you're right, after a quick check I find WELL does not seem to 
have a particularly slow internet connection.  At least based on the 
following which may be of interest.


From zabriskie.berkeley.edu:

     /usr/etc/ping -s well.sf.ca.us 56 10
     round-trip (ms)  min/avg/max = 49/63/98
     
     /usr/etc/ping -s netcom.com 56 10
     round-trip (ms)  min/avg/max = 18/28/57
     
     /usr/etc/ping -s rahul.net 56 10
     round-trip (ms)  min/avg/max = 51/55/61

     /usr/etc/ping -s access.digex.com 56 10
     round-trip (ms)  min/avg/max = 3630/5157/6531
     
(!) Not a statistically significant sample of course.  And, again,
off topic for this newsgroup in any case....

Steve
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: CHECK YOUR CONFIG!!!!!!
From: antoon.vanroon@grapevine.lrk.ar.us (Antoon Vanroon) 
Date: 18 Dec 92 11:41:00 GMT
Reply-To: antoon.vanroon@grapevine.lrk.ar.us (Antoon Vanroon) 
Distribution: world
Organization: The GrapeVine BBS *** N. Little Rock, AR *** (501) 753-8121


   Please, all sysops....check your mail import/export config.

   One of you is importing usenet mail in the GAP DOORS (409) conference

   Canada Remote Systems.

 -Tony
---
 * Canada Remote Systems, Toronto, 416-629-7000
 * PostLink(tm) v1.04  CRS (#118) : RelayNet(tm)
                                                                                                              
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: gardner@convex.com (Steve Gardner)
Subject: Re: EFFector Online 4.04 Civil Disobedience by H.D. Thoreau
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 21:05:17 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In article <725429868.26743@zooid.guild.org> ron@zooid.guild.org (Secret Mud) writes:
>From: wixer!cactus.org!wixer!pro-smof.cts.com!shiva@cactus.org (System Smof)
>If Thoreau is a typical liberal arts major, then we need a lot more of them.
	Here here! Bravo!

>Maybe he just needs a more modern editor to help make his writing a little
>more concise.  
	No way.  Don't change a single word.  Anyone who isn't moved by his
	words doesn't know and love the english language.  He is a master
	and his essay on civil disobedience is rightly considered a 
	masterpiece.  


								smg
	

Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.security.misc,alt.privacy,alt.society.civil-liberty
From: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Subject: Re: CERT and the Dept. of Justice on keystroke monitoring
Reply-To: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 23:57:26 GMT

In article <1992Dec22.150816.13247@qiclab.scn.rain.com>, leonard@qiclab (Leonard Erickson) writes:
>But "goverment-owned" or even "public property" *still* involves property
>rights. City Hall is public property, right down to the supplies in the
>storeroom. That does *not* mean that the public can walk in and use the 
>supplies.

Actually, it doesn't involve property rights, ie. government doesn't
have rights.  What is involved is a policy of what the public property
should be used for and the issue of how the policy is made.  If the
policy decided by the public on City Hall is that it is for use by
hired workers only, the public doesn't have a right to walk in and use
them.  If the policy is that everything is for public use, then they
have a right to do so.

>"Public property" generally has some purpose or reason for existence. And
>the administering agency has property rights, not all that different from
>those a private person or company would have.

I think they're very different.  When a private person owns something,
she need not give any reason for anybody else on why she decides to do
something with the thing.  But as you say, public property has a
purpose - and the duty of the administering agency is to use the
property for that purpose.  The agency has no right to use the public
property in a way the heads of the agency like - the policy should
come from the public.

>At the federal agencies, you do *not* have a right to access on
>their system anymore than you have a right to access any *phsyical*
>property they have.

You are right, if the policy is that it's not for public use.  But the
citizens do have a right to have a say in the policy.

>And at educational sites, the *students* may
>have access rights but not the general public. Just like with the
>classrooms and labs. 

Again, if it's publicly funded the general public has a right to have
a say on the policy.  Also, via academic freedom I'd say there are
some privacy (and other) rights involved.

(by the way, where I live the lectures at universities are public, the
law says they must be)

//Jyrki
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: rita@eff.org (Rita Marie Rouvalis)
Subject: Re: WELL anonymity policy
Originator: rita@eff.org
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Distribution: inet
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 23:11:14 GMT

In article <1h86l4INN4lo@agate.berkeley.edu> spp@zabriskie.berkeley.edu (Steve Pope) writes:

>Most access services are willing to let the _subscriber_
>decide if a pseudonymous login is desirable, whereas
>WELL puts its own criteria ahead of those of the subscriber.
>This is, at least, an atypical way of approaching
>fairly important privacy issue.  I cannot for the life
>of me imagine why so many people posting here have
>a problem with the fact that I have a few misgivings 
>about this policy.  

	No, actually it is a pretty typical way of approaching the
issue  -- more liberal than some systems, less so than others.

	I don't think anybody really cares one way or another about
what you think of the policy.  But you asked for folks opinions and
they gave them to you.  That's what USENET does.

	Personally, I don't know what your point is.


-- 
Rita Rouvalis                                Electronic Frontier Foundation
rita@eff.org                                                    eff@eff.org
CIS:70007,5621                                                (617)864-0665
From: ygoland@edison.seas.ucla.edu (The Jester)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Why Programing Projects Fail-A Student's View
Date: 22 Dec 92 06:56:53 GMT
Organization: Republicans for Sanity

I was looking through my requirements to graduate after reading the
various comments about programing projects from hell. I noticed
something very interesting, there isn't a single software management
class or ANY management class in the whole bunch. Apparently UCLA
doesn't consider this very important. Actually thats not true. You
see UCLA is in a budget nightmare, they have been cuting every class
they can in order to get the cattle er undergraduates out of here as
quickly as possible. There used to be a requirement called 'computers and
society' or something like that, it was basically a requirement that
you took some class that would give you an idea of what effect your
programs might have on the world around here. But as the budget
requirements came down the pipe it was the first thing they axed. 

				The Jester
-- 
                    The Jester-PGP ver2 upon request
"It's because somebody knows something about it that we can't
talk about physics. It's the things that nobody knows anything
about we can discuss."- Richard Feynman
From: honey@citi.umich.edu (Peter Honeyman)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Re- Novell buys Unix System
Date: 30 Dec 1992 20:59:39 GMT
Organization: Center for Information Technology Integration, Univ of Michigan
Distribution: world
Reply-To: honey@citi.umich.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: hone.citi.umich.edu

Brad Hicks writes:
|> Novell doesn't allow caffeine anywhere on its corporate property.

this is nonsense.  i have been served coffee at novell in provo and in
walnut creek.

	peter
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: chris@engineer.mrg.uswest.com (Chris Fedde)
Subject: Re: [misc.activism.progressive]  Clinton Office Requests Comments
Organization: USWEST Marketing Resources
NntpPostingHost: engineer.mrg.uswest.com
Date: 21 Dec 92 06:13:38 GMT

In article <BzDGLD.82C@cs.uiuc.edu> kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>[A repost  Carl]
[...]
>
> The U. S. Mail address for the Clinton/Gore Transition Team is:
>
> 
>Carl Kadie  I do not represent any organization; this is just me.
> = kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =

I take it from this post that our president elect's transition team
does not have an email address?  

	just a thought
	chris
 
Chris Fedde, USWEST MRG, chris@mrg.uswest.com, voice +13037842823
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.privacy
From: johne@PROBLEM_WITH_INEWS_GATEWAY_FILE (John Eaton)
Subject: Re: Calif DMV DEMANDS SSN for Driver License!?
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 18:03:10 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Hewlett-Packard VCD
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

Rip Torn (gallaghe@vax.sonoma.edu) wrote:
: 
: Also on the same note, I have another friend who registers his car out of
: state.  He filed a ficticious name statment and has a mail drop out of
: state, the car is owned by the company stated on the ficticious name statment.
: He clames this is legal since the car is a company car from out of state and
: he doesn't have to go through half the bull that california makes us do and
: it costs him much less money.
:
---------------
So how does he insure the car? If his rates are based upon the out of state
location then the insurance company will take a dim view if it is driven
constantly in a higher rate area. If he has a claim (esp a Big one) the
first thing they will do is check to see if they can deny coverage.

John Eaton
!hp-vcd!johne
From: dpassage@soda.berkeley.edu (David G. Paschich)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: RSA sucks (Re: PGP warning (ooo; I am scared))
Date: 28 Dec 92 06:28:41 GMT
Distribution: inet
Organization: U.C. Berkeley, CS Undergraduate Association
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu

Just to add another datapoint to the discussion of whether the RSA
technology is being sat on or not, a free license for the use
of RSA technology was granted to the people who make cleints and
servers for the freely-distributable, network-based, arcade-style
game Netrek to use to ensure that clients with too many features (like
auto firing) are not used in the game.

Of course, this doesn't mean that I support software patents, just that
I don't think the RSA folks happen to be being fascists with theirs.



-- 
David G. Paschich	Comp Sci Undergrad Association		UC Berkeley
dpassage@soda.berkeley.edu			  dpassage@ana-ng.chaos.org
"We will create a new political climate where the system does not
attract ego-driven, power-hungry people." -- Ross Perot
Xref: sparky comp.org.eff.talk:7949 alt.security.pgp:374
From: injc@helios.rz.tu-clausthal.de (Joerg Czeranski)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.security.pgp
Subject: Re: [sci.crypt, et al.]  Re: PKP/RSA comments on PGP legality
Date: 22 Dec 92 21:18:00 GMT
Organization: Techn. Univ. Clausthal
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

David Sternlight (strnlght@netcom.com) wrote:
: My position is clear. RSA has patents on a wonderful invention and they are
: entitled to the fruits of their work. To cheat them of those fruits is wrong,
: regardless of the legal situation outside the US., or whether one will get
: caught or not.

I don't doubt, that RSA is a wonderful invention, but it is not solely the
work of Rivest, Shamir & Adleman.  They proposed the encryption scheme
(and discussed it), but many articles were written about RSA by others,
investigating how secure single bits are, etc.  Isn't RSA only interesting
because it's strength was broadly discussed in the open literature?

How can PKP hold a patent, withholding the fuits of others' work from
U.S. citizens regardless of any legal situation?  Isn't such a patent
very unethical?

I will not consider it unethical using PGP, I am indeed going to try it -
I have heard much good about it.  The length of the whole dicussion
suggests, that PGP is indeed worth wasting so much energy on deciding
if it is ethical to use it (or might this be a typical usenet
discussion? ;-).

Well, have a merry christmas altogether,
joerg

--
Joerg Czeranski
Osteroeder Strasse 55          EMail injc@sun.rz.tu-clausthal.de
W-3392 Clausthal-Zellerfeld    SMTP  injc@[139.174.1.3]
Germany

(.sig under construction, sorry for the inconvenience)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal)
Subject: Re: Beneficial Virus?
Organization: Cuddlehogs Anonymous
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 01:40:47 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.235206.20192@panix.com> rpowers@panix.com (Richard Powers) writes:
:>I doubt any virus could be beneficial.  The closest idea for one was to have
:         ^^^
:
:Quite a broad statement there.  I came up with an idea (never
:implemented BTW) for a file compression virus for use on my home

You, and everybody else's brother.  I actually implemented this about two
years ago for my own amusement for the Acorn Archimedes, and then deleted
it because it was just too dangerous to release.  That's the trouble with
viruses - some asshole always gets his hands on the code and tweaks it to
do something really stupid.

G
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: bhayden@teal.csn.org (Bruce Hayden)
Subject: Re: Why PTO doesn't get it, was Re: Legal Stuff!
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.
Distribution: inet
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 15:10:40 GMT

howard@titan.hal.com (Howard Gayle) writes:

>In article <1992Dec29.003326.3552@gmuvax2.gmu.edu>, pfarrell@gmuvax2 (Pat Farrell) writes:
>> I think we should start looking 
>>for solutions that can be realisticaly implemented. Viable
>>solutions start with rethinking the fundamental assumptions of
>>software patents. Helpful steps may be as simple as moving 
>>the whole PTO to a city where the salaries are competitive.

Or maybe adopt the suggestion of privitizing the PTO. That way
they can raise their fees high enough to hire competitively.

Bruce E. Hayden
(303) 758-8400
bhayden@csn.org

Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.amateur-comp,soc.culture.usa,alt.activism