HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jk87377@cc.tut.fi (Juhana Kouhia)
Subject: PC Unixilla
Organization: Tampere University of Technology
Distribution: sfnet
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 13:47:49 GMT



Olen ihmetellyt minkalainen PC-koneen pitaisi olla, jotta
kone olisi hyva ja pyorittaisi Unixia kohtuullisesti.

Tassa on taman hetkiset tulokset. Lahetelkaa lisaa vinkkeja
minulle -- lahetan koosteen riittavan ajan kuluttua...


-486
-ram: 8 Mbytes, kannattaa kiinnittaa huomiota miten
 ram-muisti kasataan korteille, koska jos myohemmin
 laajentaa muistin 16 megaan, niin vanhat piirit voivat jaada
 kayttamatta. 70 ns piirit kayvat hyvin; 60 ns piireilla ei saavuteta
 merkittavaa hyotya.
-Cache: muistin nopeutta kasvatetaan yleensa cachea kasvattamalla, ei
 siis ostamalla 60 ns muisteja. Vahintaan 256 kilon cache.
 Varmista, etta cache-piirit kuuluvat emolevyn hintaan.
-Kovalevyt:
 AT-IDE on halvempi kuin SCSI-systeemi.
 AT-IDE ei saa olla emolevylla.
 Voiko samassa koneessa olla seka AT-IDE etta SCSI-levyt?

Tassa on yhden PC-ammattikayttajan mielipide (en mina).
Mita mielta olette 386-pohjaisesta koneesta?

Saan laiteluetteloita ensi viikonlopuksi, joten seuraavana katselen
laitteita siten, etta kokoonpano pyorittaa myos linuxia.
Jos linux pettaa, niin BSD-unixin saa kuulemma pienta lisenssimaksua
vastaan... tutkin asiaa.


Juhana Kouhia
From: sinkkone@plootu.Helsinki.FI (Janne Sinkkonen)
Newsgroups: sfnet.atk
Subject: Re: Sarjaportit UNIXissa
Date: 28 Jul 92 10:00:52 GMT
	<1992Jul28.062703.20142@nic.funet.fi>
Distribution: sfnet
Organization: University of Helsinki (Finland)

ptuomola@saha.fmi.fi (Petri Tuomola) writes:

   Mik{li ei kuitenkaan ole sattunut konfiguroitavia vastaan (varsinkin
   sellaiset jotka saa konfiguroida mihin IRQ:hun tahansa ovat harvinaisia,
   yleens{ osaavat vain IRQ3 & IRQ4:n), portin k{ytt{m{n IRQ:n vaihtaminen
   onnistuu pikkuisen korttia kolvaamalla eik{ ole edes vaikeaa, jos vaan
   kolvi pysyy k{dess{. 

Ei sattunut olemaan kolvia -> k{ytin teippi{ ja hyppylankaa... :->

Janne
From: jtk@rwmke.mil.wi.us (Joseph T. Klein)
Newsgroups: milw.general
Subject: test
Date: 31 Jul 92 00:52:12 GMT
Article-I.D.: rwmke.1085
Distribution: milw
Organization: Joseph T. Klein for Register of Deeds

test
-- 
Free and open access to information is needed          Joseph T. Klein
for the maintenance of a modern democracy.             jtk@rwmke.mil.wi.us
                                                       (414) 372-4454
From: 5916rahmank@vms.csd.mu.edu (Anisur Rahman)
Newsgroups: milw.general
Subject: Re: test
Date: 31 Jul 92 16:12:49 GMT
Article-I.D.: vms.0095E639.DB2D6F40
Reply-To: 5916rahmank@vms.csd.mu.edu
Distribution: milw
Organization: Marquette University - Computer Services

In article <1085@rwmke.mil.wi.us>, jtk@rwmke.mil.wi.us (Joseph T. Klein) writes:
>test
>-- 
>Free and open access to information is needed          Joseph T. Klein
>for the maintenance of a modern democracy.             jtk@rwmke.mil.wi.us
>                                                       (414) 372-4454

It works!

Anis
From: cooney@dhump.mil.wi.us (Mike Cooney)
Newsgroups: milw.jobs
Subject: AutoCAD Trainer
Date: 25 Jul 92 17:02:40 GMT
Article-I.D.: dhump.1992Jul25.170240.21134
Organization: Nubeat Communications
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4


 I'm looking for another well qualified AutoCAD Training & Support
 Person. This will be a contract position and if you have the
 requisite customization skills, will likely lead to permanent
 employment. Our focus is in Mechanical CAE/CAD/CAM.

______________________________________________________ 
Mike Cooney		New Vision   
                        120 Bishops Way Suite 132 
cooney@dhump            Brookfield, WI 53005 
		        414-796-2838
Newsgroups: pnw.general,seattle.general,rec.backcountry
From: bright@nazgul.UUCP (Walter Bright)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: FDA still at large
Date: 25 Jul 92 17:36:34 GMT
Reply-To: bright@nazgul.UUCP (Walter Bright)
Organization: Zortech, Seattle

In article <1992Jul25.041036.16207@fylz.wa.com> fyl@fylz.wa.com (Phil Hughes) writes:
/As a person I feel I have the right to select whatever method of
/"treatment" that I want.  I have no problem with a testing agency
/(like Consumer Reports) collecting statistics and offering me decent
/information on various treatments but I still feel I have the right to
/select whatever treatment I want.

I agree fully with you. But I feel compelled to make the point that with
such individual freedom comes individual responsibility. It will have to
be assumed that an individual making such a choice has made an informed
choice. The current trend in America is that nobody is responsible for
their decisions, if they don't work out, it is always somebody else's
fault. This sad state of affairs would have to change in order to allow
people to make their own decisions regarding their body.

Freedom and responsibility are two sides to the same coin.
Slavery and irresponsibility are two sides to another coin.
From: bbaugh@pdaxs.techbook.com (bruce)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: FDA still at large
Date: 25 Jul 92 17:45:11 GMT
Article-I.D.: pdaxs.16aHoB2w165w
Organization: Portland Public Access sponsored by TECHbooks Bookstore

I am in complete agreement with you on the proper role of outside 
supervision in medical treatment. But then I'm a patient of Dr. Wright, 
so my feelings are running high at the moment.

Oh, digression: Now that I think about it, I first saw copies of LIBERTY 
and THE FREEMAN in Dr. Wright's waiting room. I wasn't convinced right 
off (as in, for half a decade or so), but they were an influence.


---
bbaugh@pdaxs.techbook.com (bruce) (Public Access User)
pdaxs gives free access to news & mail. (503) 644-8135 - 1200/2400, N81  
Send to info@techbook.com for more information.
Public access users are <NOT> affiliated with TECHbooks.  
Newsgroups: pnw.general
From: kurt@eskimo.celestial.com (Kurt Cockrum)
Subject: Re: Ayn Rand and Libertarianism
Organization: >>> Eskimo North (206)-FOR-EVER <<<
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 20:27:47 GMT

In article <VVaHoB1w165w@pdaxs.techbook.com> bbaugh@pdaxs.techbook.com (bruce) writes:
>The problem _I_ had (and have) with Rand is that her philosophy involves 
>a number of false dichotomies. The most important of these is between 
>serving one's own interests and serving the interests of others. In 
>practice, there are lots of things I can do that promote the well-being 
>of others as well as myself; when my interests are going to be attended 
>to in any event, why NOT consider others?

Indeed, for many people, "looking out for number one" *means* "looking out
for others", particularly when it becomes apparent how deeply intertwined
relations between ourselves and the remainder of the world are.

Sex, working for social change, political activism, etc. all can be regarded
as examples of this.  These are all instances of where consideration of others
increases the quality of one's own experience.  Much of life can have this
quality.  Maybe this is what Rand meant.  However, if she did, and expresses
her ideas so poorly that people get the idea that a dichotomy exists (rather
than say, an implication),
a) how is it that she failed to perceive this and make an attempt to correct
   it?
b) why hasn't some Randian with better expository capabilities come along?

[...]
-- 
kurt@grogatch.celestial.com (Kurt Cockrum)
From: bright@nazgul.UUCP (Walter Bright)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: FDA still at large  (long)
Keywords: FDA, unconstitutional illegal action,single-issue blindness
Date: 28 Jul 92 03:19:04 GMT
Reply-To: bright@nazgul.UUCP (Walter Bright)
Organization: Zortech, Seattle

In article <1992Jul26.185412.24583@klic.rain.com> keithl@klic.rain.com (Keith Lofstrom) writes:
/Why is the FDA doing this?  They aren't the monsters that certain of my
/libertarian friends would have you believe.  The problem is that they are no
/more omniscient than you or I, and they have no way of telling what will
/be eventually learned about these things.  Since their charter is to prevent
/anything unconventional that might be harmful, they go after things that are
/unconventional - because they have no way of determining what will be harmful
/in the long run.

FDA employees suffer from being *ordinary people*. The reason we get poor
and counterproductive results from them is because that is the way the
system is set up.

The FDA is set up to prevent bad drugs from reaching the marketplace. They
get hammered if they approve something that turns out to be bad (like
thalidomide). They get a few weak protests if they delay a drug that is
a lifesaver (after all, it is very difficult to prove in court that
a particular experimental drug will save anyone). So, FDA worker bees
will *always* err on the side of delay, caution, and requests for additional
data, because they need that data to cover their asses.

There is no way to measure the lost lives and lower quality of life due to
the FDA slowing down (by years) the rate at which new treatments become
available. There is no way to measure the human cost of promising treatments
never developed because of the burden the FDA dumps on developers.

I read a statistic somewhere (I can't remember where) about the percentage
of new treatments that turn out to be more dangerous than useful. It seems
that the percentage before and after the appearance of the FDA is about the
same. It is just the quantity of new treatments that has drastically dropped.
We can thank another regulatory agency for achieving the opposite goals
of its mandate... (Ah, there I go, it is not really the FDA's fault, but
the fault of the people who want the FDA. Just like, I don't blame the
cop for giving me a speeding ticket, I blame the dogooders for enacting
the unfortunate 65 speed limit on highways built for 75.)
From: wood@eisley.akita.com (Ken Wood)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: government still at large (was Re: FDA still at large)
Summary: Government Slack suckers!!!
Keywords: FDA, unconstitutional illegal action,single-issue blindness
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 01:13:37 PDT
Organization: Mos Eisley Spaceport BBS

bright@nazgul.UUCP (Walter Bright) writes:

> In article <1992Jul26.215744.5482@eskimo.celestial.com> kurt@eskimo.celestial
> 
> /In general, there's just not enough slack in this society, and what there
> /is, seems to be zero-sum, and permanently scarce, and evaporating faster
> /than hydrogen snow.  Subvert the Planetary Work Machine!
> 
> The slack in the American economy is about 45%. This is the surplus skimmed
> off and flushed away on non-productive activities by the government. We

        [ ROFL ]

     If you only knew how funny this is.  :-)  Not that I would ever try 
to put words in Kurt's mouth but I think he meant something a little 
different that what you did.  In the context I'm thinking of your lines 
are really pretty funny.  


     Ken Wood



+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| wood@eisley.akita.com           :     Don't eat the rocks.              |
| eisley!wood@polari.online.com   : -The First Law of Bovine Cogitation.- |
| wood@seanews.akita.com          :                                       |
| wood@pismo.wa.com               :     Who let the pigs play poker?      |
| (In above order of preference.) :     Evo Shander was right!            |
| "Don't look back, someth'in might be gaining on ya."  -- Satchel Page   |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: pnw.general
From: dcb@kopachuk.uucp (David Breneman)
Subject: Re: Ayn Rand and Libertarianism
Organization: Tacoma Screw Products, Inc.
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 19:37:16 GMT

In article <VVaHoB1w165w@pdaxs.techbook.com> bbaugh@pdaxs.techbook.com (bruce) writes:
>The problem _I_ had (and have) with Rand is that her philosophy involves 
>a number of false dichotomies. The most important of these is between 
>serving one's own interests and serving the interests of others. In 
>practice, there are lots of things I can do that promote the well-being 
>of others as well as myself; when my interests are going to be attended 
>to in any event, why NOT consider others?
 
No reason why you can't.  I think Rand's point was that you should be
under no *obligation* to consider others as long as your actions don't
infringe on their rights.  Even she admitted that her characters were
stylized and would never exist in real life - they were paradigms
intended to illustrate her philosophy.  I guess you could sum it up
by saying coerced philanthropy is slavery.

>It wasn't until encountering libertarians who agreed with me on this 
>point that I was able to move out of my statist rut to my current 
>position.
> 
>(As articles in LIBERTY point out every so often, she was also guilty of 
>a number of basic logical fallacies. This hurts any claim to be running 
>purely on reason.

Well, she wasn't Ms. Spock.  Even Socrates is not entirely consistent
100% of the time.  The attempts by some of her followers like Leonard
Piekhoff (sp?) to deify her are really repulsive to anybody who's read
and understands her work.  Nobody's infallible, even the Pope :-)

>                    I much prefer Jan Narveson's approach in THE 
>LIBERTARIAN IDEA, in which he establishes a political order not based on 
>intuition, but goes on to recognize that what people _do_ in such a 
>society will and should be based on non- and extra-rational 
>considerations of virtue.)

Is this a book?  I'll have to read it.  Again, I think Rand's point
was to demonstrate objectively (hence the name Objectivism) that
freedom is better than slavery.  Since people are not totally
objective all the time (or even most of the time) there are other
ways to prove this, too.  The sad thing is that there is even the
call for its proof.  It should be, as Jefferson said, "self-evident".
I always thought one of the most fascinating conversations in the
world would have been to get Ayn Rand and Joseph Campbell discussing
the nature of the human spirit.


-- 
David Breneman     Sys Admin, Tacoma Screw Products, Inc. |  ____  ____  ____
dcb@tacoma.uucp           |   SCREWIE the TSP CLOWN sez-  |   /   /___  /___/ 
 ..!uunet!tacoma!dcb      |  "Nylok lock nuts lose their  |  /   ____/ / 
CompuServe: 75760,1232    | binding strength after 1 use!"|
From: dag@tc.fluke.COM (David Gunderson)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Northwest AIDS Walk 1992
Keywords: Walk AIDS
Date: 30 Jul 92 15:05:12 GMT
Article-I.D.: tc.1992Jul30.150512.6836
Distribution: pnw
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA

The 6th annual pledge walk for the Northwest AIDS Foundation will be
held at the Seattle Center on September 20, 1992. The goal this year
is to top $1.25M in contributions. Call (206)323-WALK for registration
forms.  There are 4 courses this year, ranging from 1 to 4.3 miles. If
you can't walk, please sponsor someone who is. If you want to Captain a
team, call the number and ask for the Team Captain info.

--David Gunderson
From: tsang@cs.washington.edu (Donald Tsang)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: Seattle Newspapers
Date: 24 Jul 92 23:50:22 GMT
Article-I.D.: beaver.1992Jul24.235022.29618
Followup-To: email -- ts@cup.portal.com
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle

In article <> bradley@mdd.comm.mot.com (Michael Bradley) writes:
>In article <62701@cup.portal.com> ts@cup.portal.com (Tim W Smith) writes:
>>Moving day is fast approaching, and thus I will soon have to make that
>>important decision: should I get the Times or the PI?
>>
>>Brief observation indicates that news coverage is about the same.  The
>>Times seems to win the comics race hands-down.  Sports looked about the
>>same.  I didn't see enough issues to really determine editorial slant.
>                                                                 ^^^^^
>Times - very liberal
>PI - just a little less liberal

I thought it was the other way around.  One is a Hearst paper; I just
can't remember which one.  They're printed and distributed by the
same printer, I guess.

>>Does anyone care to offer opinions or suggestions?
>
>Probably the biggest decision is whether you want your paper in the 
>morning (PI) or evening (Times)

No, no, a thousand times no!

The biggest decision is how much you like good Comix.  The Times has
Calvin & Hobbes, Fox Trot, Baby Blues, Robotman, ... definitely primo
stuff.  If you prefer Peanuts, you might want to go with the PI.

>>Oh, while I'm here, what is TV reception like near U of W?  Will an
>>indoor set of rabbit ears get the networks (including FOX) reasonably,
>>or will I need cable?

KCPQ-13 (the FOX affiliate, and the channel that shows Star Trek) is
hard to get without cable.  The other ones (ABC, NBC, CBS) vary, but
a good antenna will probably suffice.


PS  Sorry for the bandwidth on pnw.general.  It might be interesting
    to others who are considering the University of Washington, though.

-- 
Donald Tsang                    "Ho!  Haha!  Guard!  Turn!  Parry!  Dodge!
tsang@june.cs.washington.edu     Spin!  Ha!  Thrust!"
..!uw-beaver!june!tsang                       -- Robin Hood Daffy
Newsgroups: pnw.general
From: alpinist@eskimo.celestial.com (David Butler)
Subject: Re: pandhandlers
Organization: =>ESKIMO NORTH (206) 367-3837 SEATTLE, WA.<=
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 17:55:15 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.220843.11820@u.washington.edu> monaghan@carson.u.washington.edu (Tracy Monaghan) writes:
>In article <MS-C.712181957.377401575.mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU> Mark Crispin <mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU> writes:
>>Kurt Cockrum apparently considers that panhandlers are `making a living.'

>>Panhandling is not making a living, for the simple fact that they aren't
>>engaged in any productive activity.  Panhandling is a worldwide problem, and

>You could include most lawyers, all politicians, among others in this
>'non-productive' group :)

 Don't forget televangelists.

-- 
****************************************************************************
* Dave                          *               The Alpinist               *
* alpinist@eskimo.celestial.com *            DARE to be stoopid!           *
****************************************************************************
From: bbaugh@pdaxs.techbook.com (bruce)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Homeless by Choice?
Date: 28 Jul 92 19:03:53 GMT
Article-I.D.: pdaxs.7symoB1w165w
Organization: Portland Public Access sponsored by TECHbooks Bookstore

David W. Barts: for what it's worth, one of the four former homeless I 
referred to in my last post _was_ homeless by choice. He simply didn't 
want to bother with the hassles of employment and keeping a home; 
eventually he changed his mind. Neither he nor the other 
homeless/ex-homeless folks I talked with wanted to hazard a close guess 
as to how many homeless are so by choice, but their consensus was that 
perhaps 20-25% of the homeless are so by choice, and about the same 
number are so deeply mentally ill that they're choice doesn't count for 
anything.

---
bbaugh@pdaxs.techbook.com (bruce) (Public Access User)
pdaxs gives free access to news & mail. (503) 644-8135 - 1200/2400, N81  
Send to info@techbook.com for more information.
Public access users are <NOT> affiliated with TECHbooks.  
Newsgroups: pnw.general
From: sds@jazzie.com (Sean Shapira)
Subject: Re: Seattle Newspapers
Organization: Jazzie Systems, Seattle, Washington, USA
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 17:41:07 GMT

In article <62701@cup.portal.com> ts@cup.portal.com (Tim W Smith) writes:
>should I get the Times or the PI?

Tim, I can't imagine anyone doing a better job than you at
introducing themselves to their new electronic neighbors.
Congratulations!

On the paper question, may I recommend two other alternatives?
Both Charmin and Scott brand toilet papers are available in most
Seattle area stores.  Both of these are much easier to flush
down the toilet than either the Times or PI....
-- 
Sean Shapira        seans@microsoft.com        sds@jazzie.com
Xref: sparky pnw.general:1667 or.general:483 pdx.general:962 or.forsale:1460
From: holly@verdix.com (Holly Isaak)
Newsgroups: pnw.general,or.general,pdx.general,or.forsale
Subject: Roommate Wanted
Date: 28 Jul 92 18:39:28 GMT
Article-I.D.: verdix.4581
Reply-To: holly@verdix.com (Holly Isaak)
Organization: Verdix Western Operations; Aloha, OR

Non-smoker to share 1400 Sq. foot house  (3 bdrm, 1 1/2 bath, living 
room, family room, wood stove, outside deck)

Location:  185th and Baseline, Aloha
           Close to Sequent, Tektronix, Intel, OGI

On Bus line

$350 + Utilities

Call 690-1116 (days) or 645-5638 (evenings)
Xref: sparky pnw.general:1602 seattle.general:2299
From: ts@cup.portal.com (Tim W Smith)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Seattle Newspapers
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 00:18:06 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

Moving day is fast approaching, and thus I will soon have to make that
important decision: should I get the Times or the PI?

Brief observation indicates that news coverage is about the same.  The
Times seems to win the comics race hands-down.  Sports looked about the
same.  I didn't see enough issues to really determine editorial slant.

What is the connection between these papers?  I notice that the phone
number for subscriptions is the same for both of them.  That seems a
little odd.

Does anyone care to offer opinions or suggestions?

Oh, while I'm here, what is TV reception like near U of W?  Will an
indoor set of rabbit ears get the networks (including FOX) reasonably,
or will I need cable?

--Tim Smith
Newsgroups: pnw.general
From: josh@Happy-Man.com (Joshua_Putnam)
Subject: Re: government still at large (was Re: FDA still at large)
Reply-To: Joshua_Putnam@happy-man.com
Organization: Happy Man Corp., Vashon Island, WA 98070-7399
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 23:04:34 GMT

In <1992Jul28.175234.3653@eskimo.celestial.com> alpinist@eskimo.celestial.com (David Butler) writes:

> Well, it sure as heck doesn't 'trickle down' to the populace.  Over the past
>Decade the richest 10% of the nation went from owning a little less than 1/4
>of the nations wealth to over 1/3.  That means the majority got poorer.

The majority may have gotten poorer, but these numbers sure don't
prove it.  They don't say anything about it.

If, for example, the value of the nation's assets doubled
over the last ten years, the bottom 90% of the population went from
owning .75*X to owning .66*X*2, or 1.32*X.  If I could increase my
standard of living 76% by allowing my employer's wealth to nearly
triple, I'd do it overnight.  Then do it again if I still could.

If the value of assets grew by just 15% over the last decade, the
bottom 90% went from owning .75*X to .66*X*1.15, or .76*X, a very
slight (1.3%) improvement, obviously, but hardly getting poorer in 
absolute terms.

I don't have a reference for the total value of the nation's wealth
over the last decade, so I'll pose this as a question:  did the bottom
90% get poorer, or did the value of the nation's assets increase less
than 15% over ten years?
-- 
 Joshua_Putnam@happy-man.com    Happy Man Corp.  206/463-9399 x102
 4410 SW Pt. Robinson Rd., Vashon Island, WA  98070-7399  fax x108
 We publish SOLID VALUE for the intelligent investor.  NextMail OK
Info free; sample $20: Send POSTAL addr: Solid-Value@happy-man.com
Newsgroups: pnw.general