From: C70:human-nets (C70:human-nets)
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #67
Newsgroups: fa.human-nets
Date: 1982-05-19 23:14:09 PST
>From G.MDP@Utexas-20 Tue May 18 10:28:42 1982
HUMAN-NETS Digest Tuesday, 18 May 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 67
Today's Topics:
Query - Nomic Players & Braniff Intrigue,
Programming - Dijkstra & Languages for Good Programming
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 16 May 1982 1556-CDT
From: David Phillips
Subject: Nomic, "The Paradox of Self-Amendment" game
I am intrigued by Nomic, the game by Peter Suber described in the June
1982 METAMAGICAL THEMAS column in ``Scientific American''. I would
enjoy a chance to play it with others. I've entered the ``INITIAL SET
OF RULES'' in file:
Nomic.Doc
on UTEXAS-20. You can FTP the file by logging in as ANONYMOUS.
------------------------------
Date: 17 May 1982 1705-PDT
From: Craig W. Reynolds from III via Rand
Subject: AA hacked BRANIFF?
Does anyone out there know anything about the charges by the Braniff
exec that unnamed persons at American Airlines had hacked Braniff's
flight reservation computer system? They also alleged other nasty
business practices (such as "jaw boning" Braniff's bankers).
Specifically it was stated that data on the computer system was
modified to indicate that scheduled flights did not really exist, and
deleted some passenger reservations.
-c
------------------------------
Date: 17 May 82 16:41-PDT
From: rubin at SRI-TSC
Subject: Dijkstra's Ego
Despite the lofty tone of his writings, Professor Dijkstra is anything
but egotistical. I believe the Good Professor is really quite a
humble and self-effacing man; his writing style simply belies his true
nature. I feel we should offer not flames but our forbearance for a
problem that Dr. Dijkstra must understand all too well.
It is practically impossible to teach good writing to students that
have had prior exposure to Dutch: as potential writers they are
mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration.
--Darryl
------------------------------
Date: 18 May 1982 00:58-EDT
From: Keith F. Lynch
Subject: Dijkstra
I didn't see any positive comments about any language from
Dijkstra. I wish he would tell us what computer languages, if any, he
considers useful, or at least harmless.
...Keith
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 17 May 1982 09:33-EDT
From: Jon Webb
Subject: Dijkstra
I have been taught Structured Programming by people following
Dijkstra's approach at Ohio State and the University of Texas at
Austin, and also I have listened to some lectures by Dijkstra at those
places, and I must say that there is definitely something there.
Programming in the way Dijkstra advocates leads to a much deeper
understanding of the algorithm, and can often lead to a more elegant
or more efficient algorithm. This is especially true when the
programs compute number-theoretic or bottom-level operating system
functions. The problem with applying Dijkstra's approach to more
complex problems, like user interfaces, is not in the methodology but
in the ill-defined nature of the problem to be solved, and the fact
that the problem must be solved regardless of the elegance of the
algorithm.
Jon
------------------------------
Date: 17 May 1982 1706-PDT (Monday)
From: davidson
Subject: good BASICs
It's rather tiresome to read about all of these totally incompatible
"good" BASICs. Even if portability is not an issue (do you really
want to reinvent the wheel constantly?) everyone should know that nice
control constructs (WHILE, REPEAT ... UNTIL, etc.) are not what Pascal
(and Pascal derived languages) are about, and is very little of what
constitutes the discipline of structured programming. ALGOL had those
constructs, but Pascal has handily replaced it. The strength of
Pascal is in the data structures, and in the compile time type
checking. However, I wish to emphasize that structured programming is
not dependent on the programming language used. In fact, until the
design of a program is nearly complete, it should be in English.
Pascal's virtues, then, are two: (1) making coding easier, and (2)
making bugs harder.
Greg Davidson
------------------------------
Date: 17 May 82 8:27:31-EDT (Mon)
From: Dave Farber
Subject: Programming Languages
Sounds to me that we are mixing up a lot of things. I have always
taken the position that a person who claims to be a professional in
this field should have a selection of tools. In one part of the
computer business that means a selection of languages. I speak Basic,
Pl/1, SNOBOL, Fortran, Pascal, Modula, Ada, Lisp etc and have a
working acquaintance with several others (even IPL V). The fact that
I first learned the 650 L language seems not to have damaged me beyond
hope. The main problem in my mind is knowing when to use what
langauge. To do string manipulation in Fortran is difficult while to
do floating point calculations in SNOBOL is rather foolish.
Again there is a need for many tools and people who know when a
particular tool is applicable.
Dave
By the way, a person who knows how only one machine is programmed at
machine level is illiterate in this field also.
------------------------------
Date: 17 May 1982 1217-EDT
From: PETER MILLER AT METOO
Reply-to: "PETER MILLER AT METOO in care of"
Subject: Anthropomorphic Languages (Truths That Might Hurt)
One of the greatest truths that has been learned from the development
of programming languages and programming systems is that there is no
single language or programming technique that is perfectly suited for
every problem.
The greatest problem faced by non-programming professionals in
attempting to use computers is the mapping problem - how to state and
solve their problem (which is well-understood in their own internal
model) in another quite alien model.
I would agree with Bruce Lucas that I would rather have a thoroughly
rigorous, mathematically-oriented language (probably programmed by
mathematicians) for problems such as FFT, string-matching, etc.
Other problems - office-oriented information systems, and business
data processing - seem less well-suited for such languages and
programmers.
Anthropomorphic languages, as real production tools, are really in
their infancy. Precision is possible. Even building good software
engineering practice into such a language is possible. Model-based
programming with natural language-style syntax offers the potential of
supporting a larger programmer base than is currently possible.
Regardless of the elitist contempt that EWD holds for such
technologies, they will be given their opportunity to compete in the
marketplace.
Peter B. Miller
------------------------------
End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************
From: C70:human-nets (C70:human-nets)
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #73
Newsgroups: fa.human-nets
Date: 1982-07-31 22:22:18 PST
>From Pleasant@Rutgers Sat Jul 31 03:13:39 1982
HUMAN-NETS Digest Saturday, 31 Jul 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 73
Today's Topics:
Administrivia
NSF Study
Computer Access in the Home
Future Shock and Network Videotapes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 30 Jul 1982 1929-EDT
From: Mel
Subject: Administrivia
Hi folks,
The Human-Nets digest is alive and well and once again on the
move. Submissions for publication should be mailed to
HUMAN-NETS@RUTGERS. Matters concerning additions, deletions, and
changes to the mailing list as well as requests for archives and the
like should be sent to HUMAN-NETS-REQUEST@RUTGERS. Just in case you
forget, all the pointers at -AI, -UTEXAS, -BRL and -SCORE have been
updated to re-route any messages sent to them to me.
-Mel
------------------------------
Date: 14 Jun 82 12:48-PDT
From: mclure at SRI-UNIX
Subject: NSF study
c. 1982 N.Y. Times News Service
WASHINGTON - A report commissioned by the National Science
Foundation and made public Sunday speculates that by the end of this
century electronic information technology will have transformed
American home, business, manufacturing, school, family and political
life.
The report suggests that one-way and two-way home information
systems, called teletext and videotex, will penetrate deeply into
daily life, with an effect on society as profound as those of the
automobile and commercial television earlier in this century.
It conjured a vision, at once appealing and threatening, of a
style of life defined and controlled by videotex terminals throughout
the house.
As a consequence, the report envisioned this kind of American home
by the year 1998:
''Family life is not limited to meals, weekend outings, and
once-a-year vacations. Instead of being the glue that holds things
together so that family members can do all those other things they're
expected to do - like work, school, and community gatherings - the
family is the unit that does those other things, and the home is the
place where they get done. Like the term 'cottage industry,' this view
might seem to reflect a previous era when family trades were passed
down from generation to generation, and children apprenticed to their
parents. In the 'electronic cottage,' however, one electronic 'tool
kit' can support many information production trades.''
The report warned that the new technology would raise difficult
issues of privacy and control that will have to be addressed soon to
''maximize its benefits and minimize its threats to society.''
The study was made by the Institute for the Future, a Menlo Park,
Calif., agency under contract to the National Science Foundation. It
was an attempt at the risky business of ''technology assessment,''
peering into the future of an electronic world.
The study focused on the emerging videotex industry, formed by the
marriage of two older technologies, communications and computing. It
estimated that 40 percent of American households will have two-way
videotex service by the end of the century. By comparison, it took
television 16 years to penetrate 90 percent of households from the
time commercial service was begun.
The ''key driving force'' controlling the speed of videotex
penetration, the report said, is the extent to which advertisers can
be persuaded to use it, reducing the cost of the service to
subscribers.
But for all the potential benefits the new technology may bring,
the report said, there will be unpleasant ''trade offs'' in
''control.''
''Videotex systems create opportunities for individuals to
exercise much greater choice over the information available to them,''
the researchers wrote. ''Individuals may be able to use videotex
systems to create their own newspapers, design their own curricula,
compile their own consumer guides.
''On the other hand, because of the complexity and sophistication
of these systems, they create new dangers of manipulation or social
engineering, either for political or economic gain. Similarly, at the
same time that these systems will bring a greatly increased flow of
information and services into the home, they will also carry a stream
of information out of the home about the preferences and behavior of
its occupants.''
The report stressed what it called ''transformative effects'' of
the new technology, the largely unintended and unanticipated social
side effects. ''Television, for example, was developed to provide
entertainment for mass audiences but the extent of its social and
psychological side effects on children and adults was never planned
for,'' the report said. ''The mass-produced automobile has impacted on
city design, allocation of recreation time, environmental policy, and
the design of hospital emergency room facilities.''
Such effects, it added, were likely to become apparent in home and
family life, in the consumer marketplace, in the business office and
in politics.
Widespread penetration of the technology, it said, would mean,
among other things, these developments:
-The home will double as a place of employment, with men and women
conducting much of their work at the computer terminal. This will
affect both the architecture and location of the home. It will also
blur the distinction between places of residence and places of
business, with uncertain effects on zoning, travel patterns and
neighborhoods.
-Home-based shopping will permit consumers to control
manufacturing directly, ordering exactly what they need for
''production on demand.''
-There will be a shift away from conventional workplace and school
socialization. Friends, peer groups and alliances will be determined
electronically, creating classes of people based on interests and
skills rather than age and social class.
-A new profession of information ''brokers'' and ''managers'' will
emerge, serving as ''gatekeepers,'' monitoring politicians and
corporations and selectively releasing information to interested
parties.
-The ''extended family'' might be recreated if the elderly can
support themselves through electronic homework, making them more
desirable to have around.
The blurring of lines between home and work, the report stated,
will raise difficult issues, such as working hours. The new
technology, it suggested, may force the development of a new kind of
business leader. ''Managing the complicated communication in networks
between office and home may require very different styles than current
managers exhibit,'' the report concluded.
The study also predicted a much greater diversity in the American
political power structure. ''Videotex might mean the end of the
two-party system, as networks of voters band together to support a
variety of slates - maybe hundreds of them,'' it said.
Copies of the report, titled ''Teletext and Videotex in the United
States,'' were scheduled to be available after June 28 from
McGraw-Hill Publications, 1221 Avenue of the Americas, New York, N.Y.
10020.
------------------------------
Date: 15 Jun 1982 0844-PDT
Subject: Computer access in the home
From: WMartin at Office-8 (Will Martin)
In the light of the recent submission concerning the NSF study on
information technology:
If this topic is of interest to you, watch your local PBS affiliate
for a re-airing of the series "Media Probes". This is generally
interesting as a survey of jobs and practices in the electronic media,
but the last show in the series is particularily appropriate toward
this topic.
It is titled "The Future", and purports to be a factual account of an
experimental installation of high-tech two-way cable and computer
access in a small Ohio town, "Sugar Falls". However, the people
interviewed and portrayed are determined to be obviously actors after
a few minutes of watching, and the technology, especially the over-use
of voice recognition, proves that the situation is fictional; there is
a statement to that effect at the very end of the closing credits.
Nonetheless, the portrayal of the supposed effect of this technology
on the habits and family life of the subjects are of interest, even
though some seemed over-dramatized.
Even though this has finished its initial run, PBS repeats such series
many times, and some affiliates may still be carrying it delayed some
time later than the local one here did, so I thought it was
appropriate to mention now. Watch for it or call your local station
for info on it.
By the way, is there a mechanism for buying or renting videotape
versions of PBS shows or series for educational or business purposes?
(Aside from just taping them off-the-air, I mean.) Some series, such
as this one, or "Fast Forward", look to be appropriate for use in
education or training classes in data processing or similar fields.
How could I go about finding out how much it would cost to obtain such
programs for private use by our training section? I have a catalog of
cassettes from NPR; is there something similar for video from PBS?
What about from the commercial networks?
Will Martin
USArmy DARCOM ALMSA
------------------------------
Date: 16 June 1982 0015-PDT (Wednesday)
From: lauren at UCLA-Security (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: Future Shock and Network Videotapes
I am always amused by these studies predicting tremendous changes in
our "way of life" based on Teletext, Viewdata, Cable, and similar
technologies.
Anybody who looks behind the headlines sees that there are a number of
problems with these technologies, many of which are economic rather
than strictly technical.
For example, the study that claims 40% of U.S. homes will have 2-way
data services by the turn of the century can be flipped over: almost
2/3 of the homes WILL NOT have such services by the turn of the
century. Experience is already beginning to show that
"advertiser-sponsored" teletext/viewdata services do not seem capable
of holding their own -- advertisers by and large need more display
capability than most of the services provide, and usually (except in
certain situations) prefer much more verbose ads than are conveniently
possible with these text systems. The upshot of this seems to be that
most of these services will be pay-as-you-go... which is not
necessarily bad, but means that we are creating the potential for yet
ANOTHER stratification of society -- those who can afford access to
public online data systems and those who can't. If large numbers
can't, we face some serious problems -- especially as these services
become more of a necessity for "success".
Studies of existing Viewdata systems seem to indicate some serious
problems. To maintain a profit, most information in the databases has
been priced in such a manner as to make its use impractical except by
businesses in most cases -- and in fact it turns out that even in
Britain, where these services have been around for awhile, Viewdata is
mostly a business service. And even the businesses are complaining.
The simple Viewdata channels (1200 baud in, 150 baud out) and fairly
crude ("cheap") terminal equipment prevents any really sophisticated
computer-based services (the screen size is 40 X 24, by the way), and
many businesses are used to much more complex and useful services from
their own LOCAL machines and networks... Viewdata just doesn't impress
them.
More problems? Of course. One fascinating study pointed out one
reason why Teletext systems might generally fail -- the overall
reading level of the population is so low (and falling) that many
people would be incapable of reading any but very simple text...
hardly encouraging for a new communications medium.
There are still technical issues as well. While Teletext transmits
its data over standard television signals, Viewdata requires the
phone in a typical dialup configuration (with which we are all
familiar.) However, it appears that many users would be:
a) unwilling to tie up their (single) home phone for long periods
for data calls
b) unable to afford a second line
c) unable to afford the access costs for the calls in any case
(especially when local calling areas go pffffft!)
One final note. I have access, right now, to three different Teletext
magazines here in my home. They are all fully updated and perfect
models of the types of services that are promoted for widespread use
in the future. They *are* interesting, and occasionally informative,
but usually they are not all that great. Sure, I sometimes look up
the "current" (one hour old) temperature, and freeway bulletins are
handy... but would I *pay* for this service? Hmmm. If I didn't get
this equipment for free (as part of the project) I don't think I'd
shell out money if I was the average consumer. (As an experimenter,
I'd probably buy it anyway, I will admit...)
In fact, many of the Teletext, Viewdata, and Cable TV studies are
based on situations where the users in the testbeds get the services
for FREE. Very few tests have realistically charged the users, and I
suspect we'll see a big change in acceptance rates when charging
becomes the order of the day rather than the exception. (The rosy
glow of the original "QUBE" project in Columbus has already started to
wear off... turns out that the 2-way interactive capability of the
cable is uninteresting to most users, most of whom simply want to
watch movies and sports).
I'm the first one to admit that much of this technology is fascinating
and useful ... but it *is* important to try keep it all in some sort
of perspective...
--Lauren--
P.S. Regarding videotapes of networks. All of the networks have very
strict rules regarding taping of programming. While the current state
of "home taping" regulations is in a state of flux, the rules
regarding recording for educational or other reuse are very strict and
not in question. PBS has special rules for educational users which
are comparatively liberal, and
not in question. PBS has special rules for educational users which
are comparatively liberal, I believe. In any case, the best bet is
always to call the networks themselves and talk to their legal people.
CBS, ABC, and NBC would be called in NYC, PBS in Washing__GooGLE_SEParator__
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1982-07-31 22:23:37 PST
Message-ID:
Newsgroups: fa.editor-p
Path: utzoo!decvax!harpo!npoiv!npois!ucbvax!C70:editor-people
X-Path: utzoo!decvax!harpo!npoiv!npois!ucbvax!C70:editor-people
From: C70:editor-people
Date: Sun Aug 1 01:23:37 1982
Subject: what you see is what you get
X-Google-Info: Converted from the original B-News header
Posted: Sat Jul 31 04:13:01 1982
Received: Sun Aug 1 01:23:37 1982
>From decvax!utzoo!henry@Berkeley Sat Jul 31 04:05:21 1982
"What you see is what you get" sounds like a fine idea, until one starts
to ask questions like:
"...what you get" on *what device*???
Combining WYSIWYG with formatting specifications that are sufficiently
high-level and device-independent that the text will look ok when moved
to a different device with different characteristics is very, very hard.
WYSIWYG formatters tend to present a very low-level view of text, with
change primitives being along the lines of "add a blank line here"; it
is quite difficult to abstract from this to a higher-level specification
of what the text is supposed to look like. In fact, I'm not sure it is
practical to combine WYSIWYG with high-level specifications, at least
not with any civilized user interface. WYSIWYG inherently tends to focus
people's attention on fiddling with the final output rather than changing
the basic specifications of the text.
Henry Spencer
decvax!utzoo!henry
From: C70:human-nets (C70:human-nets)
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #74
Newsgroups: fa.human-nets
Date: 1982-08-02 03:19:51 PST
>From Pleasant@Rutgers Sun Aug 1 23:16:09 1982
HUMAN-NETS Digest Sunday, 1 Aug 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 74
Today's Topics:
Future Shock of videotext --> reading ability
Videotext Future Shock -- call waiting
Ignorance @i(isn't) bliss!
User interface design
DEC personal computer
Xerox 1100 (Dolphin) User Group
Call for Abstracts
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 17 June 1982 02:41-EDT
From: Robert Elton Maas
Subject: Future Shock of videotext --> reading ability
Lauren points out that the low and falling level of reading ability
makes teletext/videotext infeasible for the general populace. Perhaps
the public-access el-cheapo bulletin board systems (CBBS et al) are
good for society in an unexpected way, despite their cruftiness by our
standards, they DO encourage youngsters to read. If everybody had
access to a bbs, maybe everybody would learn to read?
------------------------------
Date: 17-Jun-82 11:28-PDT
From: KELLEY at OFFICE
Subject: Videotext Future Shock -- call waiting
I find Lauren's list of problems a real (but hopefully not
unsolvable) challenge to the development in 18 years or sooner of a
viable (to the world) on-line market.
I have questions about one potential solution to tying up the only
line that most people can afford.
Could the "call waiting" feature, where a special signal is sent when
someone is trying to reach your busy line, switch you to voice I/O?
Of course this depends on
1) the spread of exchanges (Class IV?) that offer call
waiting
Are these installations at all driven by demand in the
market? Harder/easier for rural people?
2) communicating computers / terminals have a telephone
output.
3) software is available to detect a waiting call and switch
it.
4) that all of this does not cost more than a second line.
If the "hold" feature can not maintain a signal that the remote modem
needs to maintain the connection, then at worst, you would have to
re-establish your connection to the data service after a call
interruption. Not too bad if the remote service has a "detach"
command.
Are there solutions to the problems in this solution to this problem?
-- Kirk Kelley
------------------------------
Date: 25 May 1982 1255-PDT
From: William "Chops" Westfield
Subject: Ignorance @i(isn't) bliss!
The editorial from the May 12, 1982 issue of EDN, by Roy Forsberg:
(copyright 1982 by Cahners Publishing Company. Reprinted by
permission!) Quoted without comments....
"An interesting but alarming debate took place in print a couple of
months ago. It was interesting because of its topic - "Informing the
public (about science and technology)" and the debaters: Leon
Trachtman, a science writer, and Isaac Asimov, the well known author.
It was alarming because it occurred at all.
"Trachtman questioned the validity of three basic assumptions
underlying the need to keep a democratic society informed on science
and technology: (1) Knowledge is a good thing in itself; (2) Such
knowledge will make people wiser and better consumers; (3) The very
structure of a democratic society depends on an enlightened citizenry,
and the citizen's political and social behavior will be more
constructive when informed by a solid scientific understanding.
"The first assumption didn't bother Mr. Trachtman too much, although
he ventured that spending several hundred thousand dollars on making
the public aware of science and technology is a total waste of
resources. Asimov, arguing the pro-information side, countered that
compared with a quarter-trillion-dollar one-year defense budget full
of science-and-technology-related items, several hundred thousand is
insignificant - and a good investment.
"Regarding the last two assumptions, Trachtman showed a low regard
for the public. He maintained that any attempts to inform it about
science and technology only confuse it, in both its consumer and
social decisions -- and that such decisions are arrived at no more
rationally than if the public were totally uninformed and merely
making yes/no guesses.
"Asimov disagreed and cited several instances where death rates, for
example, are declining because the public is considering information
about medical science seriously. He closed his rebuttal thusly:
""One thing is true, attempting to educate the public in science
(and technology) is difficult. It's hard enough to get the essence...
across to graduate students let alone people who have never learned
the art of rational thought.
""The stakes, however, are very high, and we have no choice but to
try -- and, as we try, to endeavor to learn how to try even harder and
better -- and to remain undaunted by defeat.
""We may, in the end, lose. We may, in the end, have accomplished
nothing, and left the world uninformed after all. We may (as
Trachtman gloomily suspects) merely succeed in confusing the public,
at the cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars (half an advanced war
plane) a year.
""But what is the alternative? To abandon the fight? To hold high
the tattered banner of defeat? To leave the world to the @i(National
Enquirer), the astrologers and the creationists? Shall we march off
into the darkness loudly crying: 'We give up. They are just as well
off ignorant anyway. And at least we save a lot of money and in two
years we can buy one more beautiful warplane'?
""Never! As for myself, I may be defeated at last, but I intend to
struggle to the end. I will not surrender, embrace ignorance and kiss
its hideous face."
"Well said, Mr. (sic) Asimov."
------------------------------
Date: 31 May 1982 2358-EDT
From: Ron Fischer
Subject: Re: User interface design
Does anyone out there know of substantial literature specifically
about designing user interfaces for computer software? I have read
lots of individual articles over the years but would love to see some
overviews or summaries.
Please reply to me directly. If anyone would like I'll summarize and
reply to the lists.
(ron)
------------------------------
Date: 10 Jun 1982 1044-EDT
From: Kimberle Koile
Subject: DEC personal computer
I have a couple of questions about the DEC personal computer:
Is there any way to hang more than one terminal off of it?
Is the file handler provided by DEC adequate for a database
of about 2000 records, record size about 1000 bytes?
(Send answer to KK@MIT-XX.)
------------------------------
Date: 18 Jun 1982 2123-PDT
From: T. C. Rindfleisch
Subject: Xerox 1100 (Dolphin) User Group
This is to announce formation of a network user group for Xerox 1100
workstations (Dolphins). Its purpose is to stimulate communication
and sharing between computer science research groups that are using or
are interested in these machines. It differs from the WORKS group in
that it will focus on issues particular to Dolphins rather than on
workstations in general.
Xerox PARC and EOS people are included in the distribution list to
facilitate communications about new developments, bugs, performance
issues, etc. As with all network interest groups, however, this is
*NOT* to be used as a vendor advertising vehicle.
User Group Mechanics --
1) Network Addresses:
Dolphin-Users@SUMEX-AIM For mail distributed to the
entire user group
Dolphin-Requests@SUMEX-AIM For distribution list
maintenance, i.e., additions,
deletions, problems, etc.
2) Mail Handling: SUMEX-AIM will serve as the expansion point for
routing messages to group members. We run XMAILR and so can route
between most of the current internet community.
3) Administration: Initially, messages will be sent to the list as
submitted. Depending on the volume of mail, content, etc.,
messages may be collected and digested in the future.
I have assembled a list of known Dolphin users and liaisons from
various sources for this initial announcement. Please pass the word
on to others you think might be interested.
Tom R.
------------------------------
Date: 1 July 1982 16:08 cdt
From: VaughanW at HI-Multics (Bill Vaughan)
Subject: Call for Abstracts
CALL FOR ABSTRACTS (Abridged)
2d Annual Phoenix Conf. on Computers & Communication
March 14-16, 1983
------------
Sponsored by IEEE, IEEE Computer and Communications Societies, and
IEEE Phoenix Section. Topics appropriate for this conference include:
COMPUTER SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE
Multiprocessing, functional distribution; performance
prediction/analysis; computer/communication networks; architectures
taking advantage of new technology
RAS (RELIABILITY/AVAILABILITY/SERVICEABILITY)
Systems/hardware/software testing methods, failure analysis, life
testing
COMPUTER AIDED PROCESSES
CAD: tools for S/W development; applications in electrical,
mechanical, robot design; CAM flexible automation; CIM (computer
integrated manufacturing); pattern recognition, resource planning; CAT
(computer aided testing), auto. test program generation; S/W
testability, test equipment
SOFTWARE FOR DISTRIBUTED SYSTEMS
Data base; operating systems; high-level language support; debugging
and testing; decentralized control structure and protocols
INTEGRATED CIRCUITS AND DEVICES
Silicon/compound semiconductors; VLSI/VHSIC; micro/supercomputers;
radar, ECM/ESM;novel circuits and devices; direct satellite
communications
SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT AND DELIVERY
All phases of S/W life cycle; real time and other systems; technical
and managerial aspects; tools, measures, methodologies; languages;
validation, verification; field support, enhancement; documentation
THE HUMAN ELEMENT
Ease of use; man/machine communications; psychology, human factors;
education and training; the effect on people/organizations/society of
networking, personal computers, electronic mail/meetings
Authors with papers on related topics are also encouraged to submit
abstracts. Papers covering innovative ideas in related areas are
especially welcome. Please include authors' names, return address,
telephone number on the abstract. Note these important dates:
September 15: Abstract (300 words) due
October 11: Completed papers due
December 1: Notification of acceptance
January 10: Camera-ready manuscript due
Send abstract and other correspondence to Gerald Fetterer, GTE
Automatic Electric Labs, 2500 W. Utopia, Phoenix AZ 85027.
------------------------------
End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************
From: C70:human-nets (C70:human-nets)
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #75
Newsgroups: fa.human-nets
Date: 1982-08-05 03:32:49 PST
>From Pleasant@Rutgers Wed Aug 4 22:28:19 1982
HUMAN-NETS Digest Thursday, 5 Aug 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 75
Today's Topics:
Administrivia
Preliminary Announcement
Working at home (9 msgs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 4 Aug 1982 2210-EDT
Subject: Administrivia
From: Pleasant at RUTGERS
During the transition from the old moderator to the new one (me), I
managed to foul up the issue numbers. Issue 72 does not exist because
of this. I am also aware that some sites are receiving several copies
of the digest. Unfortunately, until some local distribution list
maintainers return from vacation, there isn't much I will be able to
do about this. I hope to have this problem straightened out by the
beginning of next week.
------------------------------
Date: 30 Jul 1982 1224-EDT
Subject: Preliminary Announcement
From: JMCKENDREE at BBNB
This is a preliminary announcement of the New Jersey Institute of
Technology Continuing Education Program. It is of particular interest
because students will not be expected to attend class on campus but
will telecommute via a computer terminal. A mail response to the
short form at the end of the announcement will assure a person's being
put on the mailing list for NJIT's course catalog with full
description of courses offered (both regular courses and these
computer-mediated seminars).
CONTINUING EDUCATION PARTICIPATORY SEMINARS
via
COMPUTER TELECOMMUNICATIONS
A new kind of seminar taught on your schedule, in your home or
at your workplace, with teachers and experts from all over the
country, and with more personal involvement than any continuing
education class you have ever taken before is now being planned by
the New Jersey Institute of Technology.
These seminars will be taught through computer terminals or
microprocessors connected to a nationwide easy-to-use
computerized conferencing system. Students will take part in
on-line classes, ask and answer questions, and communicate as often
as they need to with the instructor and other students. They may do
this at any hour of the day, any day of the week that is
convenient for them.
The New Jersey Institute of Technology is proud to introduce this
innovative program planned for 1983. We expect to offer
programs during three semesters: spring, summer and fall. More
than 20 courses will be offered in this program relevant to
managerial, professional and technical areas.
Among the topic areas planned are:
PROFESSIONAL WOMEN & THE WORKPLACE COMPUTERS & SOCIETY
WHAT EVERY MANAGER SHOULD KNOW ABOUT ARBITRATION THE DELPHI METHOD
MANAGERIAL WRITING CREATIVE WRITING
DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS LOCAL AREA NETWORKS
TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING N SUPPORT SYSTEMS LOCAL AREA NETWORKS
TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING COMPUTER LITERACY
MICROPROCESSORS APPLE II PROGRAMMING
PASCAL PROGRAMMING TRS-80 PROGRAMMING
HUMAN COMMUNICATION VIA COMPUTER OFFICE AUTOMATION
In many subject areas advanced seminars as well as introductory
or survey seminars will be offered. The catalog of seminars will
be available in November of 1982. These three month
seminars will be offered for approximately $600 for enrollment in
one course and less than $1000 for two courses. Special sessions
and tailored courses can be arranged for companies and organizations
seeking "in house" electronic seminars. If you wish to receive
the catalog or seek other detailed information fill out the form
below and return to the New Jersey Institute of Technology at the
address indicated.
REQUEST FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
List in order of preference the first four (4) seminars which are of
interest to you:
(1)_________________________ (2)_________________________
(3)_________________________ (4)_________________________
Other preferences_________________________
Your Name____________________________
Title________________________________
Organization_________________________
Business Address_____________________
City__________ State_____ ZIP________
Business Phone_______________________
Home Address_________________________
City__________ State_____ ZIP________
Home Phone___________________________
Age Group (Optional-Please Circle)
20-25,26-30,31-35,36-40,41-45,46-50,51-55,56-60,61-65,65+
Please return entire page to New Jersey Institute of Technology,
Division of Continuing Education. 323 High St., Newark N.J.,
07102. Please pass duplicate copies to interested associates.
------------------------------
Date: 3 Aug 82 18:59:43-EST (Tue)
From: Ben Goldfarb
Subject: Working at home
I submitted the following article to Usenet and I have received quite
a few responses that I believe the readers of this list would be
interested in reading. I shall forward them separately with apologies
to those who already read some of them on Usenet.
================
I understand that DEC has started allowing its employees to work at
home to some degree, but the details given me were sketchy. Obviously
many many firms have no problems with people working at home as long
as they make the obligatory 9-5 appearance at the office, but
apparently DEC has initiated something more interesting than that. I
am interested in knowing just what type of arrangements DEC has made
as well as what other companies are doing along these lines.
Ben Goldfarb
Uucp: ..duke!ucf-cs!goldfarb
ARPA: goldfarb.ucf-cs@Udel-Relay
[The following messages are the replies to this message. They are
separated so that digestification software will work properly - Mel]
------------------------------
Date: 30 Jul 82 18:09:25
From: duke!dennis
Subject: Re: Working at home
I've been working at home for several months now, not because of any
management program, but because office space around here is pretty
tight, and the air conditioning at the office has been notably absent.
I'm involved with a fairly large project using the IBM PC, and have
one at home with all the goodies I need to work. I have no such
regularly structured hours for it, as Will's people do, and I only
show up at my boss's office when there's a meeting or some such that
demands my presence.
All in all, I regard it as a very positive thing; I can keep my own
hours, and can easily stop work and watch Star Trek (twice a day here)
or M*A*S*H (four times a day, plus prime time) (no, I don't watch them
ALL). Since it's all stand alone (except for reading my mail and news
via a terminal program that was my first effort, IBM's offering being
worthless), I don't even need a dedicated phone line. Also, I've
recently gotten married, and working at home enables me to be with my
wife all day; we get along well being together all the time. The
space requirements at home are not great; I have a desk covered with
hardware and printouts, and a printer on a small table next to the
desk, and a bookshelf filled with those damned IBM PC manuals (at last
count, 15 of them). I'm on a monthly wage (ie, no time cards), and my
paycheck is deposited directly to my bank, so those things don't
require me to go to the office.
I've always been a loner as a programmer; the couple of times I
entered into a team programming project, I got too irritated with the
other members to work easily with them (I refuse to allocate blame; I
know I'm pretty fussy about things that may or may not matter).
I heartily recommend it, and hope I can continue to work in this way.
------------------------------
Date: 2 Aug 82 09:26:18
From: duke!harpo!decvax!pur-ee!ecn-pa.scott
Subject: Re: Working at home
Those interested in working at home might find the following book
interesting. The thesis of several of the contributing authors is
that a *lot* of the time spent by scientists and engineers (you can
decide which one you are!) is in communication. Most of that is spent
in informal dialog with colleagues. There are often very complex
communication networks among members of working groups, and certain
members act as gateways between groups. All in all, it makes for very
interesting reading. They *didn't* consider time spent doing exactly
what you are doing now, i.e. time spent on a computer terminal
reading news. Maybe news acts as a substitute for some of the informal
communication. Any thoughts on the value of shooting the breeze as
part of your job? The book is:
Communication among scientists and engineers.
Heath Lexington Books
1970
501.4/C737 (at Purdue, at least)
OCLC #97550
Scott Deerwester
Purdue University Libraries
------------------------------
Date: 1 Aug 82 13:51:26
From: duke!unc!smb (Steven M. Bellovin)
Subject: Re: Working at home
I don't find working at home to be an unmixed blessing. For one
thing, it's often too easy to get distracted by things like my SF
collection. If I'm not in the mood to work on something that *must*
be done, being at home can be the worst thing for the project.
More importantly, when I'm working at home constantly I get lonely. I
don't find 'mail' to be a substitute for face-to-face conversation,
either professionally or socially. I need the informal personal
interactions to keep me functional, and a terminal just doesn't cut
it. (To be sure, when the net is down for a few days I miss my
contacts with all you folks out there in network land as well.)
--Steve
------------------------------
Date: 1 Aug 82 08:31:28
From: duke!decvax!cca!mclure@sri-unix
Subject: Re: Re: Working at home - (nf)
For all of you interested in "tele-commuting", I recommend Toffler's
THE THIRD WAVE, and its chapter "The Electronic Cottage". As far as
I'm concerned, Toffler is a real soothsayer in that chapter.
I've been a tele-commuter for the last 3 years. In my case it's
fairly trivial to go to work. I live a block from SRI and spend 3-4
hours per day at the office and the rest of the time (and a lot more)
at home. However, even if I didn't live so close, I doubt that this
division of time would change very much.
However, I can see how tele-commuting might not be everyone's cup of
tea. Some married folks yearn to "get away" from unpleasant home
environments. Others might find the office environment better suited
to working on a computer if it requires frequent high-bandwidth
interaction with co-worker. Electronic mail often just isn't fast
enough! But for programmers, I think tele-commuting is a gigantic win
if they have quiet surroundings and find the noise of offices
distracting. The things I appreciate about working at home are:
1) no noise
2) good music
3) good food
4) other activities during lapses in programming
Because of these, I can work at a single task much longer than if I'm
at the office.
Stuart
------------------------------
Date: 27 Jul 82 21:08:23
From: duke!harpo!presby!aron
To: harpo!duke!ucf-cs!goldfarb
Subject: working at home
I work for a small software house here in Philadelphia in software
development. I've been working here for two years. From the
beginning they had a policy of providing technical types with home
terminals (we have a VAX/11/780/VMS system). My first child was born
around the time I started working, and my wife's part-time job was
scheduled to begin three weeks after the baby was born. So I asked if
I could stay home two days a week, to look after the baby while my
wife was at work. Given the company's flex time policy, and given that
90% of my work was done sitting at a terminal, I argued that there was
little reason for me to actually come in to the office. My managers
agreed to a trial. Well, two years later, I'm still working at home
two days a week. I'm still the only person in the company who has
this arrangement. One of my co-worker's wife is expecting in October,
but he hasn't expressed any interest as yet in working at home.
Another colleague would like such an arrangement when she starts her
family.
I've found that on days I work at home, I often get more done since
when I work, I really work (instead of BSing with the gang). It has
been a tremendous help to my wife, and I feel I am a full partner in
raising my son and (new-born) daughter. I have had four different
managers since I started this arrangement (things move quickly in
small companies) and not one of them has expressed any complaints or
doubts about the arrangement.
Unfortunately, our company has been going down the tubes recently, and
we were just bought out by a large conglomerate. They have promised
not to upset current work-environment policies. I hope they keep
their word.
aron shtull-trauring
harpo!presby!aron
------------------------------
Date: 28 Jul 82 10:06:23
From: duke!decvax!ittvax!freb
To: decvax!duke!ucf-cs!goldfarb
Subject: Working at home
I work at the ITT Programming Technology Center in Stratford, CT. In
our group (a research outfit), we can work at home anytime we like, as
long as we don't miss vital meetings, etc. We have even been given
terminals, modems, and dedicated phone lines for use at home (ITT
picks up the tab for everything). Sure is nice - I'd recommend it to
anyone who can convince the management...
Karl Freburger
decvax!ittvax!freb
------------------------------
Date: 30 Jul 82 03:16:31
From: duke!harpo!cornell!bob
To: harpo!duke!ucf-cs!goldfarb
Subject: DEC work policy
Well, I haven't been keeping up with DEC internal policies for the
last few years, but I do know that the "work-at-home" policy has
*always* been in effect for programmers. I have quite a few friends
in software development for DEC working on 8's, 11's, 10's, 20's.
Many of them have been there since the PDP-8 was the hot machine (i.e.
pre-11 days). One of the attractions of working there has always been
that DEC is extremely lax in work requirements. They merely insist
that you get the job done. Furthermore, they have been so lax that
some of the folks I know there tried to see how long they could get
away with doing absolutely nothing. I believe it went for a few
months before someone realized what was up. Perhaps the major source
of the trouble is that nearly everyone at DEC is a manager -- all
chiefs, no Indians. Where did you hear of a new policy being
initiated?? I'd like to know what it is.
Bob Harper
P?S
------------------------------
Date: 30 Jul 82 18:13:58
From: duke!harpo!decvax!ucbvax!menlo70!sytek!msm
To: menlo70!ucbvax!decvax!harpo!duke!ucf-cs!goldfarb
Subject: Working at home
I would be interested in the results from your "working at home" query
on net.general. Could you please either post the results to the
USENET news, or mail me a copy?
As far as Sytek (Silicon Gulch, California) is concerned, while
people are supposed to show up (at whatever hours they choose, as long
as they can still interact with others with whom they must work and
get their work done), occasional working at home days are acceptable.
In my case, I live 37 miles (one-way) from work and will sometimes not
come in but work from home (using dial-in lines for computer access and
then downloading/uploading things to/from my home micro system). We
have most all our equipment on a broadband-cable local network
(LocalNet, which we manufacture), by dialing in to it, I can still run
development systems, various test equipment, etc. as well as our Unix
systems.
Michael S. Maiten
Sytek, I__GooGLE_SEParator__
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1982-08-05 03:34:05 PST
Message-ID:
Newsgroups: fa.human-nets
Path: utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!C70:human-nets
X-Path: utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!C70:human-nets
From: C70:human-nets
Date: Thu Aug 5 06:34:01 1982
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #75
X-Google-Info: Converted from the original B-News header
Posted: Wed Aug 4 22:51:44 1982
Received: Thu Aug 5 06:34:01 1982
>From Pleasant@Rutgers Wed Aug 4 22:28:19 1982
HUMAN-NETS Digest Thursday, 5 Aug 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 75
Today's Topics:
Administrivia
Preliminary Announcement
Working at home (9 msgs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 4 Aug 1982 2210-EDT
Subject: Administrivia
From: Pleasant at RUTGERS
During the transition from the old moderator to the new one (me), I
managed to foul up the issue numbers. Issue 72 does not exist because
of this. I am also aware that some sites are receiving several copies
of the digest. Unfortunately, until some local distribution list
maintainers return from vacation, there isn't much I will be able to
do about this. I hope to have this problem straightened out by the
beginning of next week.
------------------------------
Date: 30 Jul 1982 1224-EDT
Subject: Preliminary Announcement
From: JMCKENDREE at BBNB
This is a preliminary announcement of the New Jersey Institute of
Technology Continuing Education Program. It is of particular interest
because students will not be expected to attend class on campus but
will telecommute via a computer terminal. A mail response to the
short form at the end of the announcement will assure a person's being
put on the mailing list for NJIT's course catalog with full
description of courses offered (both regular courses and these
computer-mediated seminars).
CONTINUING EDUCATION PARTICIPATORY SEMINARS
via
COMPUTER TELECOMMUNICATIONS
A new kind of seminar taught on your schedule, in your home or
at your workplace, with teachers and experts from all over the
country, and with more personal involvement than any continuing
education class you have ever taken before is now being planned by
the New Jersey Institute of Technology.
These seminars will be taught through computer terminals or
microprocessors connected to a nationwide easy-to-use
computerized conferencing system. Students will take part in
on-line classes, ask and answer questions, and communicate as often
as they need to with the instructor and other students. They may do
this at any hour of the day, any day of the week that is
convenient for them.
The New Jersey Institute of Technology is proud to introduce this
innovative program planned for 1983. We expect to offer
programs during three semesters: spring, summer and fall. More
than 20 courses will be offered in this program relevant to
managerial, professional and technical areas.
Among the topic areas planned are:
PROFESSIONAL WOMEN & THE WORKPLACE COMPUTERS & SOCIETY
WHAT EVERY MANAGER SHOULD KNOW ABOUT ARBITRATION THE DELPHI METHOD
MANAGERIAL WRITING CREATIVE WRITING
DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS LOCAL AREA NETWORKS
TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING COMPUTER LITERACY
MICROPROCESSORS APPLE II PROGRAMMING
PASCAL PROGRAMMING TRS-80 PROGRAMMING
HUMAN COMMUNICATION VIA COMPUTER OFFICE AUTOMATION
In many subject areas advanced seminars as well as introductory
or survey seminars will be offered. The catalog of seminars will
be available in November of 1982. These three month
seminars will be offered for approximately $600 for enrollment in
one course and less than $1000 for two courses. Special sessions
and tailored courses can be arranged for companies and organizations
seeking "in house" electronic seminars. If you wish to receive
the catalog or seek other detailed information fill out the form
below and return to the New Jersey Institute of Technology at the
address indicated.
REQUEST FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
List in order of preference the first four (4) seminars which are of
interest to you:
(1)_________________________ (2)_________________________
(3)_________________________ (4)_________________________
Other preferences_________________________
Your Name____________________________
Title________________________________
Organization_________________________
Business Address_____________________
City__________ State_____ ZIP________
Business Phone_______________________
Home Address_________________________
City__________ State_____ ZIP________
Home Phone___________________________
Age Group (Optional-Please Circle)
20-25,26-30,31-35,36-40,41-45,46-50,51-55,56-60,61-65,65+
Please return entire page to New Jersey Institute of Technology,
Division of Continuing Education. 323 High St., Newark N.J.,
07102. Please pass duplicate copies to interested associates.
------------------------------
Date: 3 Aug 82 18:59:43-EST (Tue)
From: Ben Goldfarb
Subject: Working at home
I submitted the following article to Usenet and I have received quite
a few responses that I believe the readers of this list would be
interested in reading. I shall forward them separately with apologies
to those who already read some of them on Usenet.
================
I understand that DEC has started allowing its employees to work at
home to some degree, but the details given me were sketchy. Obviously
many many firms have no problems with people working at home as long
as they make the obligatory 9-5 appearance at the office, but
apparently DEC has initiated something more interesting than that. I
am interested in knowing just what type of arrangements DEC has made
as well as what other companies are doing along these lines.
Ben Goldfarb
Uucp: ..duke!ucf-cs!goldfarb
ARPA: goldfarb.ucf-cs@Udel-Relay
[The following messages are the replies to this message. They are
separated so that digestification software will work properly - Mel]
------------------------------
Date: 30 Jul 82 18:09:25
From: duke!dennis
Subject: Re: Working at home
I've been working at home for several months now, not because of any
management program, but because office space around here is pretty
tight, and the air conditioning at the office has been notably absent.
I'm involved with a fairly large project using the IBM PC, and have
one at home with all the goodies I need to work. I have no such
regularly structured hours for it, as Will's people do, and I only
show up at my boss's office when there's a meeting or some such that
demands my presence.
All in all, I regard it as a very positive thing; I can keep my own
hours, and can easily stop work and watch Star Trek (twice a day here)
or M*A*S*H (four times a day, plus prime time) (no, I don't watch them
ALL). Since it's all stand alone (except for reading my mail and news
via a terminal program that was my first effort, IBM's offering being
worthless), I don't even need a dedicated phone line. Also, I've
recently gotten married, and working at home enables me to be with my
wife all day; we get along well being together all the time. The
space requirements at home are not great; I have a desk covered with
hardware and printouts, and a printer on a small table next to the
desk, and a bookshelf filled with those damned IBM PC manuals (at last
count, 15 of them). I'm on a monthly wage (ie, no time cards), and my
paycheck is deposited directly to my bank, so those things don't
require me to go to the office.
I've always been a loner as a programmer; the couple of times I
entered into a team programming project, I got too irritated with the
other members to work easily with them (I refuse to allocate blame; I
know I'm pretty fussy about things that may or may not matter).
I heartily recommend it, and hope I can continue to work in this way.
------------------------------
Date: 2 Aug 82 09:26:18
From: duke!harpo!decvax!pur-ee!ecn-pa.scott
Subject: Re: Working at home
Those interested in working at home might find the following book
interesting. The thesis of several of the contributing authors is
that a *lot* of the time spent by scientists and engineers (you can
decide which one you are!) is in communication. Most of that is spent
in informal dialog with colleagues. There are often very complex
communication networks among members of working groups, and certain
members act as gateways between groups. All in all, it makes for very
interesting reading. They *didn't* consider time spent doing exactly
what you are doing now, i.e. time spent on a computer terminal
reading news. Maybe news acts as a substitute for some of the informal
communication. Any thoughts on the value of shooting the breeze as
part of your job? The book is:
Communication among scientists and engineers.
Heath Lexington Books
1970
501.4/C737 (at Purdue, at least)
OCLC #97550
Scott Deerwester
Purdue University Libraries
------------------------------
Date: 1 Aug 82 13:51:26
From: duke!unc!smb (Steven M. Bellovin)
Subject: Re: Working at home
I don't find working at home to be an unmixed blessing. For one
thing, it's often too easy to get distracted by things like my SF
collection. If I'm not in the mood to work on something that *must*
be done, being at home can be the worst thing for the project.
More importantly, when I'm working at home constantly I get lonely. I
don't find 'mail' to be a substitute for face-to-face conversation,
either professionally or socially. I need the informal personal
interactions to keep me functional, and a terminal just doesn't cut
it. (To be sure, when the net is down for a few days I miss my
contacts with all you folks out there in network land as well.)
--Steve
------------------------------
Date: 1 Aug 82 08:31:28
From: duke!decvax!cca!mclure@sri-unix
Subject: Re: Re: Working at home - (nf)
For all of you interested in "tele-commuting", I recommend Toffler's
THE THIRD WAVE, and its chapter "The Electronic Cottage". As far as
I'm concerned, Toffler is a real soothsayer in that chapter.
I've been a tele-commuter for the last 3 years. In my case it's
fairly trivial to go to work. I live a block from SRI and spend 3-4
hours per day at the office and the rest of the time (and a lot more)
at home. However, even if I didn't live so close, I doubt that this
division of time would change very much.
However, I can see how tele-commuting might not be everyone's cup of
tea. Some married folks yearn to "get away" from unpleasant home
environments. Others might find the office environment better suited
to working on a computer if it requires frequent high-bandwidth
interaction with co-worker. Electronic mail often just isn't fast
enough! But for programmers, I think tele-commuting is a gigantic win
if they have quiet surroundings and find the noise of offices
distracting. The things I appreciate about working at home are:
1) no noise
2) good music
3) good food
4) other activities during lapses in programming
Because of these, I can work at a single task much longer than if I'm
at the office.
Stuart
------------------------------
Date: 27 Jul 82 21:08:23
From: duke!harpo!presby!aron
To: harpo!duke!ucf-cs!goldfarb
Subject: working at home
I work for a small software house here in Philadelphia in software
development. I've been working here for two years. From the
beginning they had a policy of providing technical types with home
terminals (we have a VAX/11/780/VMS system). My first child was born
around the time I started working, and my wife's part-time job was
scheduled to begin three weeks after the baby was born. So I asked if
I could stay home two days a week, to look after the baby while my
wife was at work. Given the company's flex time policy, and given that
90% of my work was done sitting at a terminal, I argued that there was
little reason for me to actually come in to the office. My managers
agreed to a trial. Well, two years later, I'm still working at home
two days a week. I'm still the only person in the company who has
this arrangement. One of my co-worker's wife is expecting in October,
but he hasn't expressed any interest as yet in working at home.
Another colleague would like such an arrangement when she starts her
family.
I've found that on days I work at home, I often get more done since
when I work, I really work (instead of BSing with the gang). It has
been a tremendous help to my wife, and I feel I am a full partner in
raising my son and (new-born) daughter. I have had four different
managers since I started this arrangement (things move quickly in
small companies) and not one of them has expressed any complaints or
doubts about the arrangement.
Unfortunately, our company has been going down the tubes recently, and
we were just bought out by a large conglomerate. They have promised
not to upset current work-environment policies. I hope they keep
their word.
aron shtull-trauring
harpo!presby!aron
------------------------------
Date: 28 Jul 82 10:06:23
From: duke!decvax!ittvax!freb
To: decvax!duke!ucf-cs!goldfarb
Subject: Working at home
I work at the ITT Programming Technology Center in Stratford, CT. In
our group (a research outfit), we can work at home anytime we like, as
long as we don't miss vital meetings, etc. We have even been given
terminals, modems, and dedicated phone lines for use at home (ITT
picks up the tab for everything). Sure is nice - I'd recommend it to
anyone who can convince the management...
Karl Freburger
decvax!ittvax!freb
------------------------------
Date: 30 Jul 82 03:16:31
From: duke!harpo!cornell!bob
To: harpo!duke!ucf-cs!goldfarb
Subject: DEC work policy
Well, I haven't been keeping up with DEC internal policies for the
last few years, but I do know that the "work-at-home" policy has
*always* been in effect for programmers. I have quite a few friends
in software development for DEC working on 8's, 11's, 10's, 20's.
Many of them have been there since the PDP-8 was the hot machine (i.e.
pre-11 days). One of the attractions of working there has always been
that DEC is extremely lax in work requirements. They merely insist
that you get the job done. Furthermore, they have been so lax that
some of the folks I know there tried to see how long they could get
away with doing absolutely nothing. I believe it went for a few
months before someone realized what was up. Perhaps the major source
of the trouble is that nearly everyone at DEC is a manager -- all
chiefs, no Indians. Where did you hear of a new policy being
initiated?? I'd like to know what it is.
Bob Harper
P?S
------------------------------
Date: 30 Jul 82 18:13:58
From: duke!harpo!decvax!ucbvax!menlo70!sytek!msm
To: menlo70!ucbvax!decvax!harpo!duke!ucf-cs!goldfarb
Subject: Working at home
I would be interested in the results from your "working at home" query
on net.general. Could you please either post the results to the
USENET news, or mail me a copy?
As far as Sytek (Silicon Gulch, California) is concerned, while
people are supposed to show up (at whatever hours they choose, as long
as they can still interact with others with whom they must work and
get their work done), occasional working at home days are acceptable.
In my case, I live 37 miles (one-way) from work and will sometimes not
come in but work from home (using dial-in lines for computer access and
then downloading/uploading things to/from my home micro system). We
have most all our equipment on a broadband-cable local network
(LocalNet, which we manufacture), by dialing in to it, I can still run
development systems, various test equipment, etc. as well as our Unix
systems.
Michael S. Maiten
Sytek, Inc.
Mt. View, CA
------------------------------
End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************
From: Pleasant@Rutgers (Pleasant@Rutgers)
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #76
Newsgroups: fa.human-nets
Date: 1982-08-09 03:36:07 PST
HUMAN-NETS Digest Friday, 6 Aug 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 76
Today's Topics:
Call Waiting (4 msgs)
Working at home (2 msgs)
Command languages, bandwidth, abbreviations and encodings. (2 msgs)
Comment on NSF Report
Educational Gap
Call for Papers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 2 Aug 1982 1252-EDT
From: Larry Seiler
Subject: Call Waiting
Call waiting already has the property of switching you to voice if a
call comes in while you are on the computer. I spent a while
wondering why I would mysteriously lose carrier, then have the phone
ring the instant I hung it up, before I discovered that the phone
company had given me call waiting on a trial basis. Unfortunately, I
have to do some of my work on VAX/VMS, which doesn't allow me to
continue an interrupted program. So call waiting with an
un-enlightened operating system is a big loss, but if I worked only
under TOPS-20 (for example), I'd love to have it.
Larry Seiler
------------------------------
Date: Tue Aug 3 19:38:06 1982
From: decvax!utzoo!henry at Berkeley
Subject: call waiting for voice breakin
There are two problems with trying to use call waiting to let a voice
call come through despite data traffic. The first is that one may not
want to leave one's data activity in the middle just to take a call;
the one-use-at-a-time-channel problem remains unsolved. The second,
and more serious, is that it is not in the phone company's interest to
encourage data traffic on residential lines and they cannot be
expected to cooperate (e.g. by choosing suitable frequencies for the
call- waiting signal). Phone company plant is designed around
statistical estimates of traffic per line; data traffic is already a
serious problem because it ties up lines for much longer periods than
normal voice communications. Charging even local calls by the minute
*might* make their attitude more reasonable.
Henry Spencer
decvax!utzoo!henry
------------------------------
Date: 3 Aug 82 11:38:17-EDT (Tue)
From: Vonglahn.EE at UDel-Relay
Subject: Videotext and telephony
I've been reading the discussion lately about tying up one's only
telephone for videotext.
My field is not telephony, but I remember reading that many are
predicting that the future will bring all-digital telephony. That is,
instead of an analog line to your analog phone, you would either have
a digital line (with digitization in the now digital phone) or a
digital line to a spot near your home, with analog the rest of the way
to your old analog phone.
If the first scenario comes to pass, it seems to me that enough
digital bandwidth would be available between your home and the phone
company to piggyback a digital bit stream on the encoded voice signal
(as several digital/voice PBX manufacturers do now). The piggybacked
videotext signal could then be split out at the phone company (and at
your home) and fed into the videotext system.
If one believes the second scenario, on the other hand, I think that
the a short hop analog line (from your home to the digitization point)
has enough bandwidth so that you could use a special modem with
frequency division muxing to put a secondary bit stream on top of the
voice signal. At the digitization point, the secondary signal would
be stripped off and fed into the videotext system. This would cost a
bit more than the first design, but it also wouldn't tie up the voice
part of the phone.
In summary, then, I think that ways could be found to get videotext
into the home over one phone line without sacrificing voice
communications while using videotext. Of course, they would require
the active cooperation of Ma Bell, which raises a whole host of other
issues.
Comments??
Pete von Glahn
------------------------------
Date: 4 August 1982 20:06 edt
From: Richard Lamson at MIT-MULTICS
Subject: Call Waiting
Before we had two phone lines in the house, we used call-waiting to
use the phone line for both data and conversations. We have a VA3451
in the house, and Vadic triple-protocol modems of some sort at the
other end.
The tone you receive when you receive a second call is sufficient to
cause the modems to hang up at at least one end (when talking to
another system with different modems, sometimes the line merely
glitched, rather than hanging up). If your host system has automatic
process saving when the line hangs up, you generally don't lose too
badly. However, I can tell you from experience that the pain involved
was sometimes sufficient to make me wish we could turn off
call-waiting for the duration of certain data calls.
This, of course, is why we now have a second line. I have a friend
who lives in a three-person (actually, the germane information is that
three programmers live there) house, and they have FOUR phone lines
into the house, one for voice, and three for data.
-- Richard Lamson
------------------------------
Date: 4 Aug 82 12:54:18-EST (Wed)
From: Ben Goldfarb
Subject: Working at home
Another good reference for people interested in "tele-commuting" and
general speculation on our future with networks is "The Network
Nation", by Turoff and Hiltz.
Chris Kent, Purdue CS
------------------------------
Date: 5 Aug 1982 0937-PDT
From: LAWS at SRI-AI
Subject: Working at Home
I thoroughly enjoy telecommuting, but then I enjoy my work at the
office also. I find that I do my best reading at home and my best
writing at the office. Programming I do best wherever there are the
fewest distractions -- it cannot be interrupted every half-hour the
way that reading and writing can.
(My experience may be colored by having much lower baud rates at home.
While word-processing is a wonderful way to write, the editing process
can be very painful over a slow line.)
As to personal contacts, I find that communication via messages is
much more time-effective than are bull sessions. Typed arguments tend
to be much better thought out and to stay focussed on the original
problems. I just wish there were a good method to communicate
drawings and pictures.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: Sun Aug 1 20:34:08 1982
From: decvax!watmath!idallen at Berkeley
Subject: Command languages, bandwidth, abbreviations and encodings.
[ This article was originally submitted to the WORKS newsgroup. ]
[ It was pointed out that the topic was more suitable for HUMAN-NETS ]
We argue here over ways to make it *easier* and *faster* to do *more*
with *less* typing, less reference to manuals, less guesswork.
Bandwidth -- that's the central issue in command language design.
People argue over schemes that will remain friendly and mnemonic and
also provide high bandwidth (usually, less typing).
To maximize bandwidth without regard for memorability, simply assign
the first 26 most heavily used commands each to a single letter of the
alphabet. Minimum typing, but hell to learn and remember!
I have seen no discussions about how to maximize memorability without
regard for bandwidth. How do we write a command language that is
really *easy* to learn and remember?
Not everyone wants to learn a command language that is optimized for
speed and brevity. To want to learn such a language, the investment
of time spent learning it must produce a day-to-day saving that is
worth it. It's not worth it to me to Huffman-encode my command
vocabulary to reduce the number of keystrokes to the absolute minimum!
Let us be careful to distinguish how command language is used
1) when you know how to do something, and
2) when you don't know how to do something.
When you know how to do something, you may be willing to learn an
encoding scheme (such as abbreviation, command-completion, adoption of
terse aliases) to make entering the known sequence of commands faster.
If you are willing to spend time memorizing an encoding scheme, it
doesn't much matter which one you choose. I think the type of scheme
used will depend on personal taste.
When you don't know exactly how to express your needs in terms of the
names of commands that will do the job for you, then you aren't at all
interested in fancy encodings. Your first objective is to get the
task done. Speeding it up can be learned later.
We all start life using command language in the second category. We
all find ourselves in the second category at some time, wondering just
what the name of that command was that did such-and-such. We know
*what* we want to do, but don't quite know *how*.
The few command languages I've seen (UNIX, Honeywell TSS, VM/CMS,
IBM/TSO, CP/M) seem to echo the sentiments of many people on this News
Network -- they are already semi-encoded for speed. They allow
abbreviations, and all kinds of neat stuff. But nobody has told me
what the design of the underling command language is. How am I to
remember even the unabbreviated command names?
I must insist that a language be designed to be easy to learn and
remember. I should be able to guess how to do things once I
understand the model. I see a lot of emphasis on abbreviations and
encodings that allow command language to be typed conveniently.
But, what is the underlying design of the language that everybody is
trying so very hard to abbreviate?
-IAN! U of Waterloo (decvax!watmath!idallen)
------------------------------
Date: 4 Aug 82 9:03:36-PDT (Wed)
From: decvax!ucbvax!G.wing at Ucb-C70
Subject: Re: Bandwidth, encodings, abbreviations and command language.
To make a rebuttal to the last news item posted on this subject from
ARPAVAX:CSVAX:mhtsa!eagle!harpo!decvax!utzoo!watmath!idallen :
The command language for VAX/VMS IS memorable, at least to a point.
Some things are a little weird, i.e. using a command file, deleting
something from a queue, but are for the most part memorable. The help
system on here is somewhat cryptic, but it is pretty good and has fast
response, unlike "man." One main reason for the site I am at (not
Populi, but RIX) chose VAX/VMS is that it DOES have a more human
oriented command language that one can understand. Another reason was
that some of the possibily better system available when this system
was booted up for the first time were not available for VAX-11/780's.
And, by the way, I didn't miss your point, you missed mine... Live
Long And Prosper, and May The Force Be With You.
The One And Only,
Philip L. Wing
U.C. at Berkeley
ETA Region IX/DOL
P.S. If you know how to send stuff by mail to the Lawerence Berkeley
Laboratory Vax/Unix, you could probably bounce something to RIX. My
account name there is the same as here...
------------------------------
Date: 2 Aug 1982 1035-EDT
Subject: Comment on NSF Report
From: PHORWITZ at BBNG
Why do forecasters have such unquestioning faith in the tenet
that communication is going to replace transportation, e.g. with
respect to work habits? If there is any group of professionals who
are NOT required to travel to a central location in order to get their
work done, surely it is the programmers. Their work habits are
perforce quite solitary, many have (or could have) access to home
terminals, and as a group they are presumably less intimidated than
most by the technology. Yet in my experience very few programmers
actually take advantage of this golden opportunity to stay away from
their place of work for weeks or months at a time. Evidently, the
higher bandwidth links associated with face-to-face communications
(which make possible the process known to ordinary humans as
"socialization") have a perceived value greater than the costs of
commuting to work.
Paul
------------------------------
Date: 3 Aug 1982 2100-MDT
From: Walt
Subject: Educational Gap
Someone recently suggested in H-N that our society was forming a
division between those who understood computers and those who didn't.
The point is apparently well taken. The August 1982 @i[Scientific
American] contains an article (in the @i[Science and the Citizen]
section, p. 64) which reads in part:
"The education in science and mathematics that American students get
in elementary school, junior high school and high school has declined
in both quality and quantity in the past decade. The decline may have
become severe enough to affect the capacity of American society to
produce a competent labor force... the future of scientific education
may be bleaker than its present. Between 1971 and 1980 the number of
candidates training to become mathematics teachers decreased by 77
percent; the number training to become science teachers decreased by
65 percent... the decline in science education, although widespread,
has not been uniform. It is the education of lower-middle-class and
working-class children that appears to suffer the most. Indeed, the
education received by an elite of middle-class students seems to have
improved in the past decade. [Paul D.] Hurd [of Stanford University]
noted that test scores of children of couples who live in the suburbs
and have had at least some college education showed little decline in
the past decade. Furthermore, the number of students taking
advanced-placement examinations in science and mathematics increased
from 24,000 to 50,000 between 1969 and 1979, and the average scores
increased in each of those years..."
------------------------------
Date: 19 Jul 1982 08:05:51-PDT
From: allegra!rba at Berkeley
Subject: Call for Papers
CALL FOR PAPERS
The Association for Computing Machinery announces a new quarterly
acm Transactions on Office Information Systems
(TOOIS)
John Limb, Editor-in-Chief
SCOPE:
Significant and original work on analysis, design, specifications,
implementation, and experience concerning all aspects of office
information systems, including:
communication systems
data management
distributed processing
office organization
user interfaces.
SECTIONS:
TOOIS will contain the following sections:
Research Contributions
Practice and Experience
Technical Correspondence
FREQUENCY:
Quarterly. First issue dated early 1983. Projected content:
400 pages annually.
Send four copies of all papers to:
John Limb
MH 3D-479
Bell Laboratories
600 Mountain Avenue
Murray Hill, NJ 07974
------------------------------
End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************
From: Pleasant@Rutgers (Pleasant@Rutgers)
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #78
Newsgroups: fa.human-nets
Date: 1982-08-15 03:08:36 PST
HUMAN-NETS Digest Friday, 13 Aug 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 78
Today's Topics:
Query - Lauren's Message on Lists,
Programming - Command Languages &
Memorable Command Language / VMS is? &
Command Languages, Bandwidth, Abbreviations and Encodings &
Text Justification,
Computers and People - Human vs. Network Names &
Computer Network Addiction...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 11 Aug 1982 2106-EDT
From: Daniel Breslau
Subject: Re: Lauren's message on lists.
Let's see:
Telecommunications messages belong on Telecom.
Messages about computers and politics belong on Poli-Sci.
Messages about computers and science fiction go on SF-Lovers.
Messages about computers and the law go on Law-digest (name?)
Messages about computers and space go on Space digest.
VAXen, CP/M, Unix, PC's, Twenex, Emacs, editors, workstations,
etc. all have their own lists.
Tell me, what belongs on Human-Nets?
Facetiously yours,
Dan Breslau
------------------------------
Date: 11 Aug 1982 1910-EDT
From: Daniel Breslau
Subject: Re: Command Languages
Ian proposed a command language where all commands must be, in
effect, English sentences (using a verb and object, with "you" as an
implied subject). This probably requires too much typing on most
systems, except --
Some people don't like Twenex, and not without reason. But
one of it's best features, and one I haven't seen elsewhere, is that
of recognition. One can start typing a command, hit and let the
computer finish it if it can. The machine won't start the command at
this point; it simply tells you what it'll do with your partial
command. If you're stuck at any point, typing a ? at command level
gets you a list of options.
Of course this isn't news to many of you. But I'm surprised I
didn't notice any mention of this on the list. I think it's the most
winning command language available, especially in the programmable
versions (PCL, et al). I'm surprised that no one else has used this
feature. Comments, anyone?
------------------------------
Date: 11 Aug 1982 1048-MDT
From: Walt
Subject: Re: Memorable command language / VMS is?
TOPS-20 has an excellent way of informing the user as to exactly what
it is that the "delete" command deletes. If you type "delete" and
press the ESCAPE key, the exec tells you what the object is. Example:
@delete (FILES) _
The cursor is left at the point indicated by the underscore.
Furthermore, the exec will complete any unique initial substring (such
as "del", "dele" etc.) when the ESCAPE is typed, and will echo a bell
for any ambiguous initial substring ("d", "de"). This is probably the
best solution to the problem that I have ever encountered.
------------------------------
Date: 11 August 1982 04:37-EDT
From: Glenn S. Tenney
Subject: Command languages, bandwidth, abbreviations and encodings.
Your comments follow my own over the past few years. A system MUST
support the neophyte as well as the experienced user. At some times
even the most experienced user becomes a neophyte, as when one hasn't
used a command for a few months. I have implemented many full screen
(VM/SP 3270) user-friendly "systems" utilizing the following basis:
* There is always a HELP command and any other command
responds to a ? with assistance.
* Providing all parameters invokes the command (ie.,
experienced user).
* Omitted required parameters cause a full screen entry
'panel' showing all entered parameters as well as what are
missing. All parameters may be changed, the command may be
aborted and missing parameters are shown with a default
value when possible. When possible, a full screen includes
some commentary about the command.
* Program function keys provides a way to 'abbreviate'
commands. These keys can change meaning being context
sensitive.
Glenn S. Tenney
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 11 August 1982 13:04-PDT
From: Jonathan Alan Solomon
Subject: Text justification
I run my mailer (BABYL) and editor (EMACS) with fill mode on, what
that does for me is it automatically inserts (new lines) into
the text for me so I do not have to do it. This seems fine but looks
awkward (in my opinion).
I have tried out justification mode (where words are spaced out across
fixed line boundaries) and don't mind it but it seems to offend others
who have to read my messages.
I just saw someone use a text justifier which inserts hyphens in for
words which are longer than the line length you specify, and keeps the
lines all the same length. It would seem to me that this is the
solution. Does anyone have any comments on the subject of text
justification? I remember an old discussion of this in HUMAN-NETS but
I don't recall if there was a final resolution?
--JSol
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 11 August 1982, 16:48-EDT
From: Robert W. Kerns
Subject: Human vs. network names
BARBER at XX complains of using addresses rather than given names. He
also refers to century old practices. I'd like to point out that
"BARBER at XX" (or "Steve Barber at XX" for those mail systems that
can handle it) is an extension of the century old practice of naming
people after where they are from, who their father is, or what their
title is.
How many Joe Smiths do you think there are in the Boston phone book?
(I count 29). There is only one Joe@HARVARD. It seems to me much
more personal to be named specifically enough not to be confused with
someone else, and to be named well enough that I can be corresponded
with. If I were to refer to "Steve Barber" without the "BERLIN@XX"
(as even HE didn't do!), it would be much less personal.
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 11 August 1982 12:52-PDT
From: Jonathan Alan Solomon
Subject: Computer Network Addiction...
While we are on the topic of ... (well even if we aren't).
I was recently reminded of yet another aspect of Computer Addiction,
which is related to how seriously someone considers the network and
the kinds of things that go on in the network environment (I'm using
the ARPANET/UUCP/Local-network/CSNET environment as an example since
it is the one I am the most familiar with).
Ever since I first "found" the ARPANET; some 3 years ago, I have
considered it a playground. It is also a place where quite a bit of
work gets done, but I think the "playground" atmosphere really
encourages the work, since if you can make your work fun then you will
want to work harder, increasing productivity, but also increasing the
addiction.
One of the ways to tell if you are addicted is how you express
yourself on the network. I have expressed myself in many ways (not
all of which are good), and I have had my feelings hurt and my ego
bruised by some of the people on the network.
If you feel hurt personally by something someone said to you in a
computer mail message, or you it more seriously at times than the
"real world", then you are addicted. Sometimes it feels like it is the
real world for me. It certainly is a place to escape from reality,
thus my addiction. I have learned to put 'puters (and the network)
into perspective, but I still get emotional about topics which I
discuss on the network, and I probably always will. This is addiction.
--JSol
Jonathan Alan Solomon, for you ARPANauts,
....ucbvax!randvax!csevax!jsol for uucp people (don't you have a
name yet?), and jsol.usc-cse@UDEL-RELAY for CSNET folks.
p.s. I have only heard the term "ARPANauts" used on UUCP to reference
ARPANET people. I have never heard ARPANaut used by Arpanet
people.
------------------------------
End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************
From: Pleasant@Rutgers (Pleasant@Rutgers)
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #90
Newsgroups: fa.human-nets
Date: 1982-09-04 22:53:30 PST
HUMAN-NETS Digest Tuesday, 31 Aug 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 90
Today's Topics:
Queries - What are Your Favorite TV Shows &
How Do I Mail to this USENET Site,
Programming - Games and Heuristics (2 msgs),
Technology - User Interfaces & Print Fonts (3 msgs),
Computers and People - Computer Names &
Motivating non-Technical People to use Computers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 31-Aug-82 14:20-PDT
From: JWAGNER at OFFICE
Subject: Hackers' favorite TV shows -- survey
I would like to compile a list of hackers'/programmers'/engineers'
favorite television shows to see how the list compares to ratings
by Nielsen and other services (Arbitron, etc.). Current programs,
reruns, cartoons, whatever your favorite is, I'd like to include it
in my survey.
If your job is in a related field, I'd like to hear from you.
Students taking CS, engineering or related courses (or their
instructors) are welcome to respond.
Please send along a very brief job description with your TV
favorite. Results will be made available when the survey is
complete. Please send all responses directly to me,
jwagner@office. Thanks.
Jim Wagner
------------------------------
Date: 31 August 1982 18:00-EDT
From: Robert Elton Maas
Subject: how to get message thru???
We've been trying for weeks to get mail thru to:
menlo70!sytek!zehntel!teklabs!tekcrd!tekcad!keithl.at.UCB-C70
Does anybody know how to reach this mailbox on USENET?
------------------------------
Date: 30 August 1982 21:20-EDT
From: Phillip C. Reed
Subject: Distributed Games
There was an article in BYTE a while back referencing a game that
was played between two PET computers that are wired together. I
believe that it is called FLASH, and that it amounts to a tank
battle, where each player can only see the terrain near his tank (as
modified by tree lines, hills, etc.).
Granted, this isn't really a network...
...phil
------------------------------
Date: 31 August 1982 1931-EDT (Tuesday)
From: Craig.Everhart at CMU-10A
Subject: MazeWar game for Altos
There is no centralized service for MazeWars; in fact, I think it's
impossible to play the same game on different Ethernets, since the
packets it uses aren't Pups, and therefore aren't transmitted by Pup
gateways.
Remember, too, when you play with possible distributed architectures
for this and similar games, that Ethernets only deliver packets with
high reliability, not with perfect reliability, so it's usually
simpler to use some architecture other than token-passing (where
you'd have to take special precautions against the token getting
lost). I believe that MazeWars runs by each player's Alto sending a
packet for each move made, picking up on packets telling where all
the other players are, and having some "I'm shooting you" protocol
between battling players; the shootee has to agree to die. But each
game will time out the existence of other players if it hasn't heard
from them.
As far as adding net and host traffic and overhead, you pretty much
can't stop taking up the net (even though you're operating at
keystroke speed and sending only tiny messages), but you can play
tricks to keep hosts from having to discard unwanted broadcast
packets. For instance, you can set most 3Mb Ethernet interfaces to
receive packets to any one host, or to receive "promiscuously"
packets to any host (this is how you write protocol debuggers).
Usually you set your receiver to pick up only those packets that are
addressed to you; but Trek does a clever thing. For each universe
being run, it computes a set Ethernet address; there are only about
15 different universes it can run. So when you join universe N, all
copies of the game program in the various machines compute Ethernet
address K = f(N), and set the Ethernet receivers to receive only
packets addressed to K, and send all game traffic to (simulated)
host K. This produces a directed broadcast! And most other
receivers on the net will ignore these packets, because they're
directed to some other host. On the Unibus 3Mb interface, no memory
transfers or interrupts happen for such packets.
Key points: truly distributed control in light of only
mostly-reliable transmission (as well as people dropping into and
out of the game at any time), and this directed-broadcast trick.
Craig Everhart
------------------------------
Date: 30 Aug 1982 2207-PDT
From: Les Earnest
Subject: Recognition of cursive writing
Regarding the handwriting recognition scheme used in Applicon cad
systems that is based on a "paper from lincoln labs in the late
50's" (H-N V5 #87), I believe that the latter was one I wrote.
While the original paper is inaccessible, an accurate description
can be found in IEEE Spectrum, May 1965, "Machine Recognition of
Human Language, Part III -- Cursive Script Recognition" by Nilo
Lindgren.
I am gratified to learn that someone is making use of this work --
it was news to me. To my surprise, no one seems to have developed a
more reliable scheme in the intervening 20-odd years.
------------------------------
Date: 29 August 1982 10:08-EDT
From: Zigurd R. Mednieks
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #89
I can readily believe that, depending on the quality of font
information available at a given site, one might prefer Helvetica to
Times Roman. For instance, the font information that comes with
Berkeley VAX Unix is awful, and this lack of quality might affect
serif fonts more than sans serif. Even though serif fonts were
designed to be readable after the degradation involved in printing,
they may not stand up as well to the degradation from poor
digitization.
There is yet another issue here: Times Roman was designed for narrow
newspaper columns. Using it in a paper laid out as a single column
of text would make that paper hard to read. I am not advocating the
abandonment of Times Roman -- in fact I would rather see more papers
use Times Roman and a two column per page format instead of a less
condensed roman font like Hershey and single column format.
Cheers,
Zig
------------------------------
Date: 29 Aug 1982 1137-PDT
From: Lynn Gold
Subject: Helvetica vs. Times-Roman
In the end, unless you have to deal with copiers which don't like
certain fonts (I once worked on a paper where a font called Broadway
didn't show up very well), it's all subjective.
When I'm choosing a font, I tend to go by a combination of what is
available on my output device, what looks good/best out of my
possible choices, and what I'm printing.
--Lynn
------------------------------
Date: 29-Aug-82 19:44:22-PDT (Sun)
From: allegra!rba at UCBVAX
Subject: How printing affexts readability
There is an extensive body of research on how various
characteristics of printing affect readability. Two
references relevant recent human-nets discussions are:
A.J. Campbell, F.M. Marchetti, & D.J.K. Mewhort,
Reading speed and text production: A note on right-
justification techniques. Ergonomics, 1981, 24, 633-640.
P.A. Kolers, R.L. Duchicky, & D.C. Ferguson, Eye
movement measurement of readability of CRT displays.
Human Factors, 23, 1981, 517-523.
Bob Allen BTL-MH
------------------------------
Date: 30 Aug 82 13:18:33-EDT (Mon)
From: Andrew Scott Beals
Subject: network naming
I can think of 2 immediate reasons why someone would be referred to
by their network address: a) it provides UNIQUE identification as to
just *who* the person is (for example: if you are talking about Joe
Smith, there could be *many* Joe Smiths around the network, but only
1 Joe@Harvard), and b) if you're reading the message, and you're
lazy like I am, you don't want to have to look back at the headers
to find out just *which* Joe Smith the author was talking about!
- Andrew
- BANDY@MIT-AI
- BANDY@MIT-OZ@MIT-ML
(AI is pretty dead these days)
------------------------------
Date: 30 Aug 82 13:42:54-EDT (Mon)
From: Andrew Scott Beals
Subject: getting non-technical people to use computers
Take away their typewriters, scratchpads, calculators, file
cabinets, and 3x5s! Make 'em use the little beasties.
But, on a more sober note, show them that it *is* better/easier than
doing it by hand, and unless they are a technical fraidy cat,
they'll use it.
- Andy
- BANDY@MIT-AI
P.S. I guess I tend to be a bit radical at times...
------------------------------
End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************
From: Pleasant@Rutgers (Pleasant@Rutgers)
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #92
Newsgroups: fa.human-nets
Date: 1982-10-17 00:28:36 PST
HUMAN-NETS Digest Tuesday, 12 Oct 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 92
Today's Topics:
Computers and People - Motivating non-Technical
People to use Computers (4 msgs),
Programming - Games and Heuristics (5 msgs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 31 August 1982 22:16-PDT (Tuesday)
From: GANESHA at OFFICE-1
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #90
Take away their typewriters, scratchpads, calculators, file
cabinets, and 3x5s! Make 'em use the little beasties.
Andrew Scott Beals
There's no better way to make them refuse. Remember,
Work consists of what a body is obliged to do, while
play consists of what a body is not obliged to do.
Mark Twain
(I think that was how it went....)
Making computers into work would be the worst possible thing...
------------------------------
Date: 1 Sep 1982 0327-PDT
Subject: Re: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #90
From: BILLW at SRI-KL
I think the best way to get non-technical people to start using
computers is to have their kids play games.... Then they play
games... then they start reading SF-LOVERS and what not (every
little network MUST have a BBOARD or bad-joke mailing list type
arrangement.) Then they start replying, and they learn how to use
the text editors and so on....
WW
------------------------------
Date: 1 Sep 1982 1347-MDT
From: Walt
Subject: Re: getting non-technical people to use computers
I once worked at a company that designs and manufactures automatic
warehousing machinery. I showed the chief mechanical engineer some
of Applicon's literature for their CAD systems. He refused to even
consider using such a system; he said "I don't type". Period. If
I'd really cared maybe I could have talked him into a mouse and
lightpen setup, but I didn't care enough to try.
------------------------------
Date: 3 Oct 1982 1211-PDT
Subject: Travelers' Computers.
From: the tty of Geoffrey S. Goodfellow
Reply-to: Geoff at SRI-CSL
a203 0920 03 Oct 82
AM-Focus-Travelers' Computers, Bjt,820
TODAY'S FOCUS: Placing Computers in the Air and in Hotel Rooms
Laserphoto Cartoon NY6
By NORMAN BLACK
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - John Q. Public, a sales manager at a major
corporation, is working at his computer terminal in New York when he
gets an order from the boss - get out to Los Angeles and help close
a major deal .
Two hours later, Public is on the airplane. He checks in by
phone for some final instructions, then pulls out a portable
terminal provided by the airline and resumes work. When he's done,
his latest sales report is transmitted back to New York, from 40,000
feet in the air.
Later that night, Public checks into a hotel. He flips on a
small computer terminal in his room, reads several ''electronic
mail'' messages waiting for him from other sales agents and files
his own report back to New York on the Los Angeles contract.
Sound farfetched? Guess again. The computer age is arriving
faster than you think.
Dallas-based Travelhost Inc. plans to begin placing small
computer terminals in hotel and motel rooms in January. The company
is convinced it can entice hotel operators to place 500,000
terminals in the field by mid-1985.
An unrelated company, Airfone Inc., hopes to begin testing the
nation's first commercial air-to-ground telephone system next month.
Assuming the experiment works, Airfone officials say it's a small
step from an airplane telephone system transmitting voices to a
phone system transmitting computer data.
Some preliminary tests indicate that the idea is feasible, says
John D. Goeken, founder and president of Airfone, a Washington,
D.C.-based company that is now 50 percent owned by the Western Union
Corp.
Officials of Airfone and Travelhost, although approaching their
ventures from different perspectives, are focusing on the same
travel market. The development of video teleconference facilities,
allowing corporate executives to meet via television, will never
completely replace the need for face-to-face meetings, the officials
say.
''This will be the first amenity introduced for the hotel
industry in the last 30 years that's significant enough to help push
the industry into a new future,'' says Dr. Lee H. Smith, president
of Travelhost. ''... this will become a vital service to the in-room
traveler that allows him to avail himself of some very good
travel-related services in an easy fashion.''
Travelhost and another Dallas company, the Quazon Corp., have
already developed a simple, ''user friendly'' computer terminal for
the new service. Quazon will manufacture the devices, with the first
to be available in January.
Smith says the terminals will prove attractive to hotel
operators because they'll receive a payment every time a terminal in
one of their rooms is turned on. Travelers, meantime, after punching
in a credit card number, will be able to send and receive electronic
messages; make airline reservations; check addresses and menus at
restaurants; peruse the offerings of merchandisers, and check the
stock market and latest news reports.
''If a person can count to 10, he or she can operate this
Travelhost terminal,'' Smith claims.
Travelhost has yet to announce how much the service will cost
the traveler, although Smith says the rates ''will certainly be
competitive with what's out there now for home computer users. A
rough ball park might be $20 an hour during peak time and $7 or $8
during non-peak.
''Portability isn't here yet for computers, and we think the
timing is absolutely right and that we can ... capture a significant
share of the market,'' he adds.
While there might not be many people carrying portable computers
now, that is clearly something envisioned by Airfone. The company
says that one day airline travelers will be able to use their own
terminal or a portable device provided by the airline to work during
flights.
''Our main concern right now is the in-flight telephone
system,'' says Stephen Walker, the joint venture liaison for Western
Union.
''But computer data transmission is one of the next steps,'' he
continued. ''There's no trick to that, really.''
If you have the equipment to attach a computer to a telephone,
he adds, ''it doesn't make any difference whether the phone is on
the ground or in the air.''
Bill Gordon, Airfone's director of network planning, says the
company has been developing the air-to-ground telephone service
since 1974.
''But it took us until 1979 to ask the Federal Communications
Commission to authorize the service and allocate frequencies,'' he
added. ''The FCC hasn't done that yet, because they want to see the
results of our experiment. We've got licenses now to build 37 ground
stations and we're reaching the point of putting the gear into the
airplanes.
''The airlines are very interested in this,'' Gordon concluded.
''They want to make the transportation time for their passengers as
enjoyable and productive as possible.''
ap-ny-10-03 1219EDT
***************
------------------------------
Date: 1-Sep-82 21:07:32 PDT (Wednesday)
From: Hamilton.es at PARC-MAXC
Subject: Re: MazeWar game for Altos
I'm pretty sure MazeWar does use PUPs. When you boot, there's a
"Host" option that lets you specify an arbitrary network address on
the Internet in order to join that machine's game. Thus it should
be possible to play between say, England, Rochester, and El Segundo,
although the response might be a bit sluggish if some players are 4
or 5 hops away.
It is true that it's possible to "cheat" by running a kludged-up
version of the program. That's why the sources have been
(informally) carefully guarded over the years.
Kudos should go to the author of MazeWar, Jim .
--Bruce
------------------------------
Date: 2 September 1982 0034-EDT (Thursday)
From: Craig.Everhart at CMU-10A
Subject: Re: MazeWar game for Altos
I stand corrected. Jim Guyton already pointed out my error
privately; enclosed are some of his remarks about how it gets the
job done. My comments were based on my bad memory of having peeked
at the network traffic; I apologize for any damage done by my faulty
memory.
Craig Everhart
- - - - - - - -
Date: Wednesday, 1 Sep 1982 20:19-PDT
Subject: Re: Mazewar
From: guyton at RAND-UNIX
Every player simply sends a single pup to every other player in the
game on every change-state. 90% of the time this is in response to
the player moving -- which is very infrequent compared to the
capacity of a 3Mbit Ethernet (and the Alto).
Each packet is not acknowledged; the assumption is that most of them
get through and the ones following a lost packet make the lost one
out of date anyway. Not entirely true, but good enough for a game!
Of course the small number of people allowed in a single maze does
help keep the communications overhead down. But the limit was to
prevent crowded mazes, not because of communications.
The only broadcast msgs are those when someone tries to join a game.
To join a game on another network you have to supply net#0# as the
duke-rat host number. It has been a long time since I left Xerox
and even longer since I leaked a version of mazewar to the
universities; but I think that that version "supported"
multiple-network games. Certainly the current version does.
-- Jim
------------------------------
Date: 6-Sep-82 15:06:06 PDT (Monday)
From: Reed.ES at PARC-MAXC
Subject: Re: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #89
"As I've overheard it, the main program for the game resides
on a Gateway, with relatively low-bandwidth screen
"transactions" being sent to the individual players'
machines (vs. fully updating each screen remotely)."
-- Ciccarelli.pa@PARC-MAXC
Mazewar operates as follows:
Up to 8 players may play. There are indeed three windows, but you
didn't describe them quite correctly. The top window shows the rat's
eye view of the maze: looking down the corridors as if you are in
the maze. The middle window is the bird's eye view you describe, and
the bottom window is also as you describe it.
Each game. when started, searches for existing mazewar games on
the local net (or a net specified by the user). If none are found,
it establishes itself as King Rat. Other games starting after the
King Rat game hook into the King Rat, which maintains the game's
database. The King Rat is listed first in the scoring area.
A game will also establish itself as King Rat when it can't enter
an already in-progress game. Thus multiple games may exist. A user
may choose which game to play by specifying the host number of the
King Rat of the game desired. This is usually found out by agreement
among the players, but the searching algorithm simplifies it.
No gateways are involved except as they fulfill their normal
functions of linking networks together.
"There is no centralized service for MazeWars; in fact, I
think it's impossible to play the same game on different
Ethernets, since the packets it uses aren't Pups, and
therefore aren't transmitted by Pup gateways."
-- Craig.Everhart at CMU-10A
This is totally incorrect. A game may be played between any machines
that are connected over any number of gateways. (I once played a
game where I was in Rochester, NY, and one opponent was in El
Segundo, CA, and a third in Palo Alto, CA. The response time was not
much worse than in a local net game.) The data packets themselves
are stuffed into Pups and transmitted/received as any other Pup is.
Your claim is more accurate for TREK (see below) than for Mazewar.
When Mazewar was first introduced, the net traffic it engendered
resulted in the management at Xerox edicting that people would not
play during working hours. It was a very popular game. The inventors
even had programs which could smash an arbitrary Mazewar program (by
sending a quit packet to it) when people were deemed to be causing
problems.
TREK's speed depends noticeably on the number of players playing,
although I don't think this is because of net traffic so much as
machine limitations. TREK operates by sending all packets to a
standard address, and each instantiation of it listens to that
specific address. This caused a lot of problems early on since the
standard address was not always available on a given net, and since
a TREK game is limited to a single network (multi-network addresses
were not supported; this may have been fixed, but I don't know), you
couldn't always predict when TREK would interfere with someone on
your network. Of course, one could always reserve specific addresses
for TREK, but that kind of thing doesn't always sit well with
network administrators.
TREK's use of distributed databases essentially results in every
machine having a copy of certain public information. Certain other
information is not public - like the state of damage to a given ship
(all the outside games see is the level of the shields and perhaps
some erratic movement.) This has certain advantages, like preventing
the game from being dependent on the status of a particular
participant. However, just choosing random addresses is not a good
idea, as we found out. Better would be to have the initial game use
it's own address. A machine need not be up in order for other
machines to listen for packets sent to it. And the fact that that
game established its own address as a valid destination for game
packets is an indication that the machine is not going to be
interfered with. Of course, if the game outlasts the initial
machine's involvement (since that player quits before the game is
over), the use of its address would be a performance problem. In
this case some mechanism should be established for switching the
broadcast address to one that is currently involved in the game.
-- Larry --
------------------------------
Date: 1-Sep-82 10:10PM-EDT (Wed)
From: Nathaniel Mishkin
Subject: Speaking of home video games
I see that various non-(video game manufacturers) (e.g. US Games)
are finally making "software" (i.e. cartridges) for other people's
(e.g. Atari) video games. Does anyone happen to know how these
people got or figured out the format for the cartridges and the
code? I'm curious whether it took this long since the introduction
of cartridge-based games for some grunt to disassemble (i.e.
uncompile) some ROM (would have been great fun). Or maybe they got
a license (less fun).
------------------------------
Date: 30 Aug 82 22:23:53 EDT (Mon)
From: Steve Bellovin
Subject: network games
The best network game I ever saw was the POLI-SCI Digest. I didn't
learn as much from it as I learned from games like HUMAN-NETS and
TELECOM, nor is it as funny as USENET -- but oh the gamesmanship....
--Steve
------------------------------
End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************
From: Pleasant@Rutgers (Pleasant@Rutgers)
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #97
Newsgroups: fa.human-nets
Date: 1982-10-22 01:55:01 PST
HUMAN-NETS Digest Friday, 22 Oct 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 97
Today's Topics:
Administrivia - Dedicated Discussion,
Technology - Worldnet (7 msgs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 22 Oct 1982 0019-EDT
From: Mel
Subject: Administrivia
Due to the large number of responses, this entire digest
will be dedicated to the WORLDnet discussion.
-Mel
------------------------------
Date: Thursday, 14 October 1982 22:35-EDT
From: AGRE at MIT-MC
Subject: WORLDNET! (long msg)
Hu-rahhh! Here are a couple of thoughts on getting worldnet
started, one positive and one negative:
(1) First positive. Here is how you can get an ersatz worldnet up
RIGHT NOW with minimal hardware investment. Some large network
company (like ITT or TPC or N others) should offer a service whereby
you call them up on the phone and give them a phone number and a
pile of bits and they ship the bits to the vicinity of that phone
number and call it up and give it the bits with appropriate header
information. Then you write software for some existing BBS's that
bundle users' messages to users in other cities and call up the
network company and ship out the bits for various cities in big
bundles whose internal structure the network company doesn't care
about. The BBS software at the other end gets a call from the
network company, sucks in the bits (all of which are for its users),
breaks them down into messages, and distributes the messages to the
intended recipients. This can be done RIGHT NOW with trivial
hardware investment (the network company has to make a minor
investment in interfaces to TPC). The network company bills the BBS
person by SnailMail and the BBS software generates SnailMail bills
for the users. There has got to be some BBS person out there
willing to talk some network company into setting up something like
this at least experimentally.
(2) Now negative. May InterNet burn eternally. Here's why. Any
small-scale commercial part of a worldnet that gets started is going
to need a core of seriously interested, tolerant, and technically
with-it network hobbyists to keep it alive financially for its first
few years. But very many such people don't have any special reason
to put their money into such a thing because they get such good
service from the ArpaNet, and for free yet. InterNet will only make
this worse by expanding the space of government and academic
networks that can serve as siphons of seriously interested network
hobbyists. Now this might be OK if the InterNet protocols were
capable of supporting anything like a proper WorldNet. (If we're
going to have DoD socialism in WorldNets, well, let's at least do a
minimally competent job of it technically!!!) But they're not, as
Jim pointed out. They just haven't haven't solved the problem of
addressing in a large space of small networks (like the one in the
Smiths' house). Even zip codes (that is, some hierarchical
geographically oriented coding system) would be better than the
crock they ended up with, which is just routing specs no matter what
they say. I don't know what action all of this implies for all of
us who are benefiting from this creeping socialism, but it sure
sucks. I could also be wrong. - phiL
------------------------------
Date: 15 Oct 1982 1530-MDT
From: Walt
Subject: Re: Worldnet!
Worldnet is not only coming, it's here and it works. Utah-20 is
directly interfaced to Telenet via my interface package. We have
two regular interactive users in Japan who link in via KDD and
Tymnet. We have had people use Utah-20 from France via, I believe,
Transpac, but this does not go on regularly.
The cost is unfortunately still rather high, but the technology
works fine. I suspect that the cost will come down as use goes up
and engineering costs are amortized.
Cheers -- Walt
PS. Usenet is a terrible model - horribly slow and unreliable.
It's a fun toy though -- W.
------------------------------
Date: 15 October 1982 18:37-EDT
From: Robert Elton Maas
Subject: WORLDNET! --> Your goals compared to PCNET's and my goals
Mostly your goals are identical with the goals of PCNET. We want
anybody to be able to join the net just by getting equipment,
looking up (in a directory) the net address of somebody else, and
just starting to send messages and wait for replies. If somebody's
equipment breaks down, it shouldn't upset all the net routing
algorithms, only messages to that node should be seriously affected.
Also all uses (play, work, amateur research, commerce, school)
should co-exist rather than each require its own network
disconnected from networks supporting the other uses.
Although high-speed operation is desirable, the net should support
low-speed operation whenever that is cheaper than high-speed
operation, as it currently is (300 baud Oregon to Florida costs only
two modems ($400 each) plus long distance charges, whereas megabaud
Oregon to Florida costs about $50,000 at each end for the
satellite-microwave equipment). A single network design should
support all speeds of equipment rather than requiring different
speeds to be on different and disjoint networks (at the least,
gateways for the major services, email, ftp, telnet) should exist
even where differing equipment requires differing low-level
protocols.
The main problem I see with USENET is that they've adopted ARPANET's
convention of English names for hosts that are assigned at random,
instead of something like PCNET's node identifiers that convey
latitude and longitude as well as phone number. This causes many
headaches with routing of messages, when a simple
geographic-proximity heuristic or even just a direct
phone-number-caller would work better for messages sent between
random points (such as from a random HUMAN-NETS reader back to the
author of a random HUMAN-NETS message). After all, why should a
message from REM at MIT-MC to keithl at tekcad have to take the
route MIT-MC -ARPA-> UCB-C70 -UUCP-> menlo70 -UUCP-> sytek -UUCP->
zehntel -UUCP-> teklabs -UUCP-> tekcrd -UUCP-> tekcad instead of
just going MIT-MC -ARPA-> UCB-C70 -ARPA-> tekcak ? Why should it be
hard to discover that a shorter route such as MIT-MC -ARPA->
Udel-Relay -UUCP-> tektronix exists? Why should one gateway be able
to dial direct but not another, just because one has secret info
such as the phone number of the recipient that the other doesn't
have? For that matter, why should the sender of the message have to
specify the whole route in the first place? (What if one of the
links in that route drops out of the worldnet?)
[At this point MIT-MC crashed for several hours and I lost the rest
of what I had typed, retaining only the above which had been saved
in a file before the crash. The rest of the message, about ten lines
about how PCNET has tried for over 5 years to build a WorldNet using
volunteer labor and still doesn't have even a 3-node network
working, how funding the creation of WorldNet is a real question,
was lost.]
------------------------------
Date: 15 Oct 82 22:35:29 EDT (Fri)
From: Velu Sinha
Subject: worldnet (LONG)
Re: Guyton's message of 10/13/82
A scientist from the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research in
Bombay, INDIA has just finished writing a paper on the theme of
worldnet. This person was here (in the US) this past month and
visited uWisconsin (CSNET && MMDF) MIT, and has been in contact with
ARPA and ALOHA people. His idea is mainly centered around India, but
the scheme that he has proposed would work anywhere. His scheme is
to put 5-6 satellites in orbit around the earth. Each satellite has
TDRSS like capability (One satellite is able to talk to another).
Every neighborhood/institution which wants to participate has to
build/buy a satellite dish. Using packet technology the message will
go from the neighborhood ground station to the satellite if the
message has to travel more than 100 miles (for messages with less
than a 100 mile destination ground radio channels are used). At the
satellite the ''path'' name will be decoded and the message will
either be relayed down to earth (if the message has to go to a place
in the range of this satellite) or the message will be sent to the
NEXT (messages can only travel a distance of ''one satellite'')
satellite, there the satellite will decide weather to re-relay it or
to transmit it down to earth...
This will allow a ''world net''. The current Indianet is still in
the planning stages and hopes for money are quite high. They plan
to have an all India prototype by the end of this decade.
Ideas, comments?
- Velu
------------------------------
Date: 17 Oct 1982 2104-EDT
From: ZALESKI at RU-GREEN (Michael Zaleski)
Subject: Why not AT&T for WorldNet?
In a recent message to Human-Nets, one reader expressed a wish for a
"World-Net", to tie all sorts of computers worldwide together. In
this message, the author stated a belief that it should not be owned
by one company and specifically stated that "Ma Bell" should not be
the owner. I must honestly say that I find this attitude toward the
phone company hard to understand. Compared to ANY other phone
system in the world, the U.S. has THE best.
Phone service in many third world countries is at a level that
Americans would find totally unacceptable. Even in France, (a
country that despite its indiscriminate sales of weapons and
technology must be called civilized) the wait for a phone is
measured in months.
(Incidentally, AT&T only serves about 40 percent of the land area in
America, although that area has 80 percent of the U.S. population.
In 1976, there were about 1600 independent phone companies. From
all accounts I hear, and from my own experience, these phone
companies provide the worst service in America. Of course, that is
still tremendously better than foreign countries, primarily because
these companies work closely with AT&T.)
So, it clearly can't be the quality of "Ma Bell's" service that
bothered the aforementioned author. Perhaps AT&T is considered
suspect because the phone rates are too high? After all, don't
companies like MCI and Sprint provide cheaper long distance rates?
They do, but my experience with MCI showed me they also provide:
- Poorer quality connections.
- An extra nuisance at dialing time.
- An extra bill every month.
- A system where it is very easy to guess and use another
(random) person's account number.
- A less flexible system. (I can't use my MCI number if
I'm away from my home area, but I can bill calls to my
home phone from anywhere.)
- Insufficient savings to justify the above annoyances.
I am particularly concerned about the security aspect, since the
future of the phone company will probably have everyone using
systems like MCI - and will probably have all kinds of problems with
people using random account numbers.
Popular belief also has it that Bell's 1200 baud data transmission
standard is inferior to Vadic's, because of some sort of resonance
problem. My experience with Bell's 1200 baud is that it works fine
both locally and long distance (New Jersey to sunny California). My
experience with local calls using a Vadic has also been equally
positive.
Overall, I feel that our phone system is one of the things we should
be most happy with. If anything, the federal government should have
gotten rid of the 1600 little companies and established one gigantic
regulated phone company. Telecommunications is sufficiently
indispensible in our daily lives that a quality system is a need,
not a luxury service to be provided in a hodge-podge manner by a sea
of independent companies. It is my understanding that the breakup
of AT&T will preclude further advances in telephone service and
flexibility. I think this is the kind of loss that will result from
the breakup of AT&T, brought about in part by the anti-big
anti-phone-company feeling that some people have.
(Also, in response to a different query - probably meant humorously
- No, the phone company does not ring phones when system utilization
is low to attempt to stimulate usage.)
-- Michael Zaleski, mhtsa!mzal@UCBVAX or "Zaleski@GREEN"@Rutgers
Bell Labs, Murray Hill, NJ
------------------------------
Date: 15 Oct 1982 09:52:29-PDT
From: twc.hp-labs at UDel-Relay
Subject: Re: WORLDNET!
There is a relatively unknown Sci-Fi novella which depicts just such
a WORLDNET as you mentioned (and maybe more). As far as I know, it
is only published as part of Binary Star #5, by Dell. The name of
the story is 'True Names' by Vernor Vinge; in the book it is paired
with a not-bad novella called 'Nightflyers' by George R.R. Martin.
This book is still in print (I think, because the Oregon State
Bookstore just got more copies) so shouldn't be too hard to find.
It is a pretty exciting visualization of the capabilities possible
with such a net.
Tw Cook - HP Personal Computer Division - Corvallis, OR
twc.hplabs@Udel-Relay
------------------------------
Date: 19 Oct 1982 1442-EDT
From: Greg Skinner
Subject: Worldnet response
It's a nice idea to dream about. However, the legal hassles
alone (forget the implementation) would probably prevent such a
thing from being developed in the next ten years or so. What with
issues such as security, protection, etc., a totally distributed
network consisting of local users running PCs would be extremely
difficult to make safe, usable, etc. for all users without there
being some centralized agency who is in charge of policy.
For example, how would users be named in such a network. By
name (given names)? Too many conflicts. By address? The addresses
would most likely be akin to telephone numbers. (Hmm... could be a
prelude to Visi-phones)
Then, you want users to be able to add themselves to the
Worldnet databases without intervention. A good idea in theory, but
in case the users make errors in their applications the network must
be smart enough to resolve those mistakes, lest great mixups occur
when users try contacting and sending messages to each other. There
should also be some sort of terminal compatibility requirement (most
nets recognize a large variation of terminals, but yet in still a
finite number not equal to ALL terminals in existence).
Even still, you will always have the destructive hackers who
will try to destroy the net from wherever they are transmitting.
The net must (!!) be protected from destruction as much as possible,
or it will be almost impossible to keep it up for long periods at a
time.
Still, it's a fun idea to think about. Maybe it should be
tried on a smaller scale first (a distributed network of students
with PCs at a university, perhaps a small city or large community).
Who knows, with a PC in almost every home in a few years, maybe
it'll be possible and desirable.
--gregbo
------------------------------
End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************
From: Pleasant@Rutgers (Pleasant@Rutgers)
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #99
Newsgroups: fa.human-nets
Date: 1982-10-22 01:56:14 PST
HUMAN-NETS Digest Sunday, 24 Oct 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 99
Today's Topics:
Queries - Tex Formatting,
Computers and People - Work Hazards & Computer Names (2 msgs) &
Cable TV and the First Amendment (4 msgs),
Technology - Tomorrow's Children,
Artificial Intelligence - Computer Architecture
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 18 Oct 1982 18:20:05 EST (Monday)
From: Mike Meyer
Subject: Tex formatting
I am in the midst of putting together a micro-based text formatter
derived from Knuth's TEX. Knuth says much about his algorithms for
spacing words out on a line, but I can't seem to find much on
putting spacing into a formula, other than that what the user types
for spacing is ignored.
Does someone out there have information on how to typeset equations
to make them look nice? Or a pointer to such information? Or a
pointer to someone who has this information (like Knuth's net
address)? If so, I would appreciate hearing from you/getting a copy
of it...
thanx,
mike
------------------------------
Date: 14 Oct 1982 12:09:49-EDT
From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX
Subject: green screen scam
I too get very unpleasant color abreactions after working for even a
short time (1-2 hours) with the more aggressively green screens; I
find this Z19 preferable to the micro I typeset on (anonymous cased
by A-M) even though the micro has letters almost twice as big. The
problem with any non-white color is that since it works by
phosphorescing it can't be muted (note that "eye-ease green" paper
(for instance), is a very pale green (the corresponding ink for use
on white paper is a very dark, non-vivid green)).
------------------------------
Date: 14 October 1982 20:25-EDT
From: Robert Elton Maas
Subject: Net Addresses
There would be a legal problem with some company giving Arpanet
addresses, since it's illegal to use the net to conduct business,
but those on TYMNET with mailboxes or those on CSNET or USENET might
be able to do that.
------------------------------
Date: Thu Oct 14 1982 15:19:42 PDT
From: Lauren Weinstein
Subject: business replies via networks & L.A. Telecommuting
Regarding the issue of why businesses don't encourage replies via
network mail... I suspect the primary problem is that few
generalized network services exist that would make such a procedure
really feasible.
For example, even assuming a business is on a commercial network
already, most of the mail services are aimed at INTRA, not INTER,
-company communications. In many cases, the fact that your mail
system is totally isolated from others on the net is a major selling
point of the system -- gotta have security, and the "hide your head
under the ground" technique is certainly an obvious one to many
businesses. Another issue is that there are a multitude of networks
popping up, with few production gateways between them (as far as
commercial users are concerned.) This will change with time, but
the sort of environment we are used to on the Arpanet is a far cry
from the comparatively restricted environments of most currently
existing commercial networks.
Additionally, there are almost certainly companies who would not
consider electronic mail an "appropriate" medium for business
queries, for their own antiquated reasons. These are usually the
same businesses where sending a TWX or TELEX message often results
in no response at all -- they just don't know how to handle a query
that comes in via such channels. If they *do* respond, they usually
immediately request your phone number so that they can *really* talk
to you.
One would expect these sorts of problems to fade as the years go by
and the network technologies become more standardized...I hope.
It goes without saying, of course, that within our own environment
here on Arpanet, such use of the net by vendors would be considered
illegal use of a DoD computer network.
-----
In response to the query regarding the proposals to encourage
telecommuting here in L.A. ... It was asked if there would be
favorable rates for high speed digital lines and such. Without
going into details, my only possible answer must be: "Surely you
jest!"
--Lauren--
------------------------------
Date: 14 October 1982 15:35-EDT (Thursday)
From: Bob
Subject: Cable TV and the First Amendment
Date: Wednesday, 13 October 1982 22:31-EDT
From: Robert Elton Maas
To: HUMAN-NETS at MIT-MC
Re: Cable TV and the First Amendment
The Constitution (bill of rights mostly) prevents Congress from
making laws that interfere with various freedoms, and the 14th
amendment extends most of those protections so that states can't
make such laws either. But I think local (city/town) governments
are free to limit freedom in any damn way they want. But I'm no
sure. Maybe this question should be sent to POLI-SCI and when
they come up with a consensus they should report back qua
committee to here?
Send the question to Poli-Sci if you must. It is so trivial that
there is no ready citation for it. If private activity substantially
resembles that of local government, that too is governed by the
14th, for that reason. Marsh v. Alabama, 326 U.S. 501, 90 L.Ed. 265
(l945).
_Bob
------------------------------
Date: 14 Oct 82 19:00:00 EDT (Thu)
From: Andrew Scott Beals
Subject: Re: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #93
There is no difference between the electronic and the traditional
media under the first amendment. Localities should have no right
whatsoever to censor cable-tv broadcasts or any other non-public
media. Have these same localities places restrictions on magazines
that one may subscribe to?
-andy
------------------------------
Date: 15 Oct 82 23:02:51 EDT (Fri)
From: Andrew Scott Beals
Subject: home censoring of television
The Sharper Image (in their latest catalog) is advertising a device
that will lock out a certain channel continuously, or during a
certain time period (unlockable, of course, by a combination). This
should shut up the people who say they can't control their own tvs.
------------------------------
Date: Saturday, 16 October 1982 12:42-EDT
From: "Marvin A. Sirbu, Jr."
Subject: First Amendment and Cable
For a review of cable regulation see TECHNOLOGIES OF FREEDOM by
Ithiel Pool (Pool@mit-Multics) scheduled for publication this spring
by Harvard University Press. see also Besen, S.M. and Crandall,
R.W., "The Deregulation of Cable Television," LAW AND CONTEMPORARY
PROBLEMS Vol 77 (l980).
The key decisions are U.S. vs Southwestern Cable Corp (392 US 157,
1968); FCC Report and Order on Cable Television 36 FCC 2d 143, 1972;
and Midwest Video vs FCC , U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit 21 Feb
1978.
------------------------------
Date: 16 Oct 1982 (Saturday) 1456-EDT
From: DREIFU at Wharton-10 (Henry Dreifus)
Subject: TOMORROW'S CHILDREN
TOMORROW'S CHILDREN
Henry N. Dreifus October, 1982
Technology seems to progress and evolve faster than humans. As
humans, we require at least one generation to pass to accept any
major technological revolution as evidenced by our track record with
such items as the Telephone, Automobile and Electricity. One can
claim the advent of the computer is such a similar revolution.
Just as we take the telephone and television more or less as
accepted and natural components of our technology, the coming
generation is being taught to accept the computer. To them the
computer screen, keyboard and storage medium are as natural to them
as the telephone is to us at their age.
One should also note that they too accept the telephone.
At a recent lecture the following numbers were mentioned: 65% of
all high schools teach computer science. At least 50% have computer
equipment of some sort. Moreover the growth rate is on the order of
10 to 15% per year. At the elementary level (Kindergarten through
sixth grade) approximately 20% of all schools have some computer
based education. This coupled with the fact that there are
approximately 3.7 million personal computers out in this marketplace
makes some very profound comment on the "naturalization" process
taking place.
It is important to understand this effect, note its passing as it is
but one objective measure of our civilization. I wonder what's next.
------------------------------
Date: 15 Oct 1982 1406-PDT
From: Paul Martin
Subject: Re: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #96
Concerning the NON-VON project at Columbia, David Shaw, formerly of
the Stanford A. I. Lab, is using the development of some
non-VonNeuman hardware designs to make an interesting class of
database access operations no longer require times that are
exponential with the size of the db. He wouldn't call his project
AI, but rather an approach to "breaking the VonNeuman bottleneck"
as it applies to a number of well-understood but poorly solved
problems in computing.
------------------------------
End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************
From: Pleasant@Rutgers (Pleasant@Rutgers)
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #100
Newsgroups: fa.human-nets
Date: 1982-11-09 05:04:37 PST
HUMAN-NETS Digest Saturday, 6 Nov 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 100
Today's Topics:
Queries - Knuth's Art of Computer Programming &
Whetstone Benchmark Programs &
Laboratory for Human-Computer Interaction,
Artificial Intelligence - An Apology & Parallelism and AI,
Technology - WorldNet (4 msgs),
Computers and People - Computer Names (2 msgs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 2 November 1982 15:35 cst
From: Heiby.APSE at HI-Multics
Subject: Knuth's AoCP
In Knuth's "Art of Computer Programming" volume 1, published by
Addison-Wessley, the preface says that the work is in seven volumes.
I have never seen any volumes other than 1-3. Do the others (any of
them) exist? Are they being written? Did they exist and are now
out of print? Obsolete?? Thanks. Ron.
------------------------------
Date: 4 Nov 1982 1136-PST
From: JBROOKSHIRE at USC-ECLB
Subject: Whetstone Benchmark Programs
In a recent exchange on INFO-PC there was a discussion about the
Whetstone benchmark, and reference to runs which had been made and
the location of the program used (FORTRAN - at USC-ISIB in
whetst.for, FTPable). I got the program and have been
doing several local studies with it. NOW - in the October issue of
DIGITAL DESIGN there is a short (almost page) discussion of the
Whetstone SERIES of benchmarks that were developed at the behest of
the British government, and exist in at least two other languages -
ALGOL and BASIC, and perhaps others. My question is: does anyone
know of the availability of these other modules/versions, or can
anyone provide literature references I could follow to get more info
on these tests? Any help greatly appreciated, and I will summarize
results and make them available for those interested.
Jerry Brookshire
------------------------------
Date: 26 Oct 82 19:05:39 EDT (Tue)
From: Mark Weiser
Subject: Laboratory for human-computer interaction
We are helping Nasa to equip a laboratory for studying human factors
in human-computer interaction. This means not ergonomics (such as
screen tilt and chair to console distance) but software and display
content aspect, menu vs. commands, high-res bitmapped vs. regular,
color or not, and anything you and we can think of. At the moment
equipment is of interest, since it takes such incredible lead times
to buy equipment for Uncle Sam. My question to you all is:
What other human-computer interaction laboratories are out
there, and how are they equipped?
I think probably the whole community will be interested, so
reply to the bulletin board (with cc to me please).
[Mark has agreed to accept your replies, compile and summarize them,
and send the summary back to Human-Nets and WorkS. Please send your
replies to Mark without cc'ing these lists. Thanks - Mel]
------------------------------
Date: Friday, 22 October 1982 15:56-EDT
From: AGRE at MIT-MC
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #96
By the way, I should make a public apology for forgetting the name
of the head of Columbia's Non-Von project, David Shaw. He and his
project are every bit as important as the others I mentioned. Also,
the discussion was indeed not one of AI rescuing computer
architecture, but rather one of computer architecture rescuing AI.
(Both are of course simplifications.)
- pHil
------------------------------
Date: 28 Oct 1982 1515-EDT
From: David F. Bacon
Subject: Parallelism and AI
Reply-to: Columbia at CMU-20C
Parallel Architectures for Artificial Intelligence at Columbia
While the NON-VON supercomputer is expected to provide significant
performance improvements in other areas as well, one of the
principal goals of the project is the provision of highly efficient
support for large-scale artificial intelligence applications. As
Dr. Martin indicated in his recent message, NON-VON is particularly
well suited to the execution of relational algebraic operations. We
believe, however, that such functions, or operations very much like
them, are central to a wide range of artificial intelligence
applications.
In particular, we are currently developing a parallel version of the
PROLOG language for NON-VON (in addition to parallel versions of
Pascal, LISP and APL). David Shaw, who is directing the NON-VON
project, wrote his Ph.D. thesis at the Stanford A.I. Lab on a
subject related to large-scale parallel AI operations. Many of the
ideas from his dissertation are being exploited in our current work.
The NON-VON machine will be constructed using custom VLSI chips,
connected according to a binary tree-structured topology. NON-VON
will have a very "fine granularity" (that is, a large number of very
small processors). A full-scale NON-VON machine might embody on the
order of 1 million processing elements. A prototype version
incorporating 1000 PE's should be running by next August.
In addition to NON-VON, another machine called DADO is being
developed specifically for AI applications (for example, an optimal
running time algorithm for Production System programs has already
been implemented on a DADO simulator). Professor Sal Stolfo is
principal architect of the DADO machine, and is working in close
collaboration with Professor Shaw. The DADO machine will contain a
smaller number of more powerful processing elements than NON-VON,
and will thus have a a "coarser" granularity. DADO is being
constructed with off-the-shelf Intel 8751 chips; each processor will
have 4K of EPROM and 8K of RAM.
Like NON-VON, the DADO machine will be configured as a binary tree.
Since it is being constructed using "off-the-shelf" components, a
working DADO prototype should be operational at an earlier date than
the first NON-VON machine (a sixteen node prototype should be
operational in three weeks!). While DADO will be of interest in its
own right, it will also be used to simulate the NON-VON machine,
providing a powerful testbed for the investigation of massive
parallelism.
As some people have legitimately pointed out, parallelism doesn't
magically solve all your problems ("we've got 2 million processors,
so who cares about efficiency?"). On the other hand, a lot of AI
problems simply haven't been practical on conventional machines, and
parallel machines should help in this area. Existing problems are
also sped up substantially [ O(N) sort, O(1) search, O(n^2) matrix
multiply ]. As someone already mentioned, vision algorithms seem
particularly well suited to parallelism -- this is being
investigated here at Columbia.
New architectures won't solve all of our problems -- it's painfully
obvious on our current machines that even fast expensive hardware
isn't worth a damn if you haven't got good software to run on it,
but even the best of software is limited by the hardware. Parallel
machines will overcome one of the major limitations of computers.
David Bacon
NON-VON/DADO Research Group
Columbia University
------------------------------
Date: Friday, 22 October 1982 19:22-EDT
From: Vince Fuller
Subject: WORLDNET ('True Names')
There has been some discussion of this book on SF-Lovers recently,
specifically concerning the general (non)availability. Check recent
SF-Lovers issues for details and info about how to obtain the book.
--vaf
P.S. It's worth reading, if you can get a hold of it.
------------------------------
Date: Friday, 22 Oct 1982 22:00-PDT
Subject: Re: Why not AT&T for WorldNet?
From: guyton at RAND-UNIX
Why not AT&T for WorldNet? Sigh . . . where do I begin?
First, this is not the Telecom Digest. We're not talking about how
well AT&T runs our phone system, or if Sprint or MCI are any better.
My comment about "Ma Bill" was unfortunate.
I guess the key point that was missed is that Worldnet must be a
well connected community of smaller networks, where each subnet can
be of a radically different communications technology.
Take a good look at the DOD InterNet community. They've got leased
phone lines for the 'ol Arpanet, satellites for some Satnets, a few
radio-packet nets, and a lot of Ethernets and some others that I
don't know how to describe. All of them up and running and talking
to each other with the same protocols (TCP/IP).
In this context it makes no sense to have any one owner of the
entire network, regardless of how well they run their communications
system.
At the same time, I'm trying to lobby for development of a very
cheap communications medium (ham packet radio is an example). This
is not crucial for WorldNet to survive, only for it to grow quickly.
You made a good point when you said the US telephone system is much
better than those systems of the rest of the world. I agree, most
other phone systems are very bad. Therefore we must not depend upon
the phone systems for WorldNet, or we will be excluding most of the
world.
Enough flaming for tonight,
-- Jim Guyton
------------------------------
Date: 23 October 1982 07:42-EDT
From: Gail Zacharias
Subject: Why not AT&T for WorldNet?
Date: 17 Oct 1982 2104-EDT
From: ZALESKI at RU-GREEN (Michael Zaleski)
...
Phone service in many third world countries is at a level that
Americans would find totally unacceptable.
We must be in pretty bad shape to find comfort in being more
technologically advanced than many third world countries...
As for the general point you are making, one might mention that
Hitler made the trains run on time. I.e. technical competence is
not the point here, power is. Something as important as a
communication network should not be controlled by any single group.
Witness for instance the recent events in Poland, where a revolution
was stopped by turning off the phones.
------------------------------
Date: Saturday, 23 October 1982, 15:42-EDT
From: Robert W. Kerns
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #97
I just couldn't let these claims go by undisputed.
Date: 17 Oct 1982 2104-EDT
From: ZALESKI at RU-GREEN (Michael Zaleski)
Subject: Why not AT&T for WorldNet?
In a recent message to Human-Nets, one reader expressed a wish
for a "World-Net", to tie all sorts of computers worldwide
together. In this message, the author stated a belief that it
should not be owned by one company and specifically stated that
"Ma Bell" should not be the owner. I must honestly say that I
find this attitude toward the phone company hard to understand.
Compared to ANY other phone system in the world, the U.S. has
THE best.
I have been victimized by ma bell's utter incompetence in the use of
computers so many times I am convinced that letting them have
anything to do with world-net would be the kiss of doom. I'd rather
let IBM do it.
New England Telephone does not even do on-line service-order entry.
They take down, on paper, the information about your service
request. They then mis-transcribe it (when they don't lose it
altogether), fail to add relevant information to the record (such as
the fact that they already called you and asked you something), and
take months to get things straightened out. (Not to mention their
billing software!) I'll spare you the case histories, but in my
experience, a service order *ALWAYS* results in a complete mess, and
wastes about a day and a half of my time.
It may or may not still be true that France is months behind in
installation, but they are actively working on correcting the
problem, and are working with such advances as distributing
terminals instead of phone books. NET has shown no visible sign of
correcting their inadequacies in the many years I've been a
customer . Comparing them with other phone companies is not the
point. Compare them with a non-monopoly, and they are clumsy,
incompetent, inflexible, and uncooperative. Hardly the kind of
company one would want to put in charge of the most exciting new
forms of communications around.
Another minor point:
They do, but my experience with MCI showed me they also provide:
- An extra nuisance at dialing time.
This is because Ma Bell doesn't provide the signalling necessary
to do it any other way.
-- Michael Zaleski, mhtsa!mzal@UCBVAX or "Zaleski@GREEN"@Rutgers
Bell Labs, Murray Hill, NJ
As far as I'm concerned, Bell Labs and the installed physical plant
are the only parts of Ma Bell worth keeping.
------------------------------
Date: 22 October 1982 10:47 cdt
From: heiby at HI-Multics
Subject: Net addresses in ads
I have seen several advertisements in the personal computer field
which give a mail address on Compuserve or The Source. This is, of
course, most prevalent in Compuserve's magazine, but I've seen it
elsewhere, as well. Ron.
------------------------------
Date: 22 Oct 1982 1102-PDT
Subject: Use of network addresses by businesses
From: WMartin at Office-8 (Will Martin)
The only publicized solicitation of net mail that I have seen has
been by columnists in Electronic Engineering Times. There were two
who gave Source and Compuserve mail addresses; the current issue
only seems to contain one -- Phil Koopman, TCP893 on The Source.
Of course, it's hard for ARPANET people to credit either The Source
or Compuserve as being "real" networks...
Will
------------------------------
End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************
From: Pleasant@Rutgers (Pleasant@Rutgers)
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #102
Newsgroups: fa.human-nets
Date: 1982-11-10 04:30:35 PST
HUMAN-NETS Digest Tuesday, 9 Nov 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 102
Today's Topics:
Queries - Let's create a University-wide LAN Directory,
Replies to Queries - Knuth's Art of Computer Programming (3 msgs),
Artificial Intelligence - Parallelism and AI,
Technology - Tomorrow's Children & Video Games,
Computers and People - Unique Signatures
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 8 Nov 1982 1001-PST
From: Hellmut Golde
Subject: Request for Information
The University of Washington, like many other Universities, is
currently embarking upon a study leading toward the design of a
Local Area Network (LAN) for the campus. There are a number of such
networks already in existence, e.g. BRUNET at Brown University or
KIEWIT at Dartmouth College. However, there appears to be no
existing inventory of such networks. I believe that such an
inventory would help many universities in their planning effort;
hence, I am suggesting that one be started.
As a first step, I tried to look into the archives for the mailing
list for the ARPANET interest group LOCAL-NETS at MIT-MC. The
archives of that interest group contained a lot of information about
protocols and other technical issues. I would rather not use that
list for the purpose at hand. I am setting up a file at our node,
LAN-info.txt. You may look at that file, although it may be
rather empty for a while. I simply ask all readers of a BBOARD to
send me mail, containing the information below, and I will add it to
the file. Any update on incomplete or erroneous information is also
welcome. I would also like to request that those of you who have
access to other networks send this BBOARD entry along. Note that I
am limiting the list to campus-wide networks, excluding small
departmental or single-building nets.
Initially, I would like to gather the following information for
every campus-wide LAN on a US or Canadian campus:
1. Name of institution and name of network (if any)
2. Name, address, and telephone number of contact person who
can provide further information
3. Brief technical characterization of network (broadband-coax,
twisted-pair, Ethernet, telephone lines, speed, topology,
etc.)
4. Operational status (planned, under construction, etc.)
5. Access to national networks (ARPANET, TELENET, etc.)
6. Literature pointers (references to further information)
Thank you.
Hellmut Golde (GOLDE at WASHINGTON)
------------------------------
Date: 6 November 1982 21:29-EST (Saturday)
From: Sam Hsu
Subject: Knuth's AoCP
yes. there are other volumes. when i was in new york, i saw volumes
5-7 -- the last one is on compilers, and one of them is on operating
systems (i think). don't remember too well. hard to find though, as
you may have noticed.
------------------------------
Date: 7 Nov 1982 7:14:20 EST (Sunday)
From: Andrew Malis
Subject: Knuth volumes 4-7
Knuth has been working on volumes 4-7, as well as revisions of
volumes 1-3, simultaneously. However, he became so upset at the how
hard it was to do his books right using the current typesetting
technology that he took a sidetrack to invent TEX, a word-processing
and typesetting system, and METAFONT, a font generator. During this
period, he also produced several scholarly works on the mathematics
and history of text fonts (sorry, I can't remember any references).
Also, since he wrote volumes 1-3 he has seen the higher-level
language light, and he is re-writing the algorithms in those and his
newer volumes in a higher-level language (probably one of his own
invention).
This is all from a talk he gave at Brown Univ. in (if I remember
correctly) 1979.
Andy
------------------------------
Date: 8 Nov 1982 0957-PST
From: Francine Perillo
Subject: Donald Knuth
The July 1982 issue of the Annals of the History of Computing (Vol.
4, No. 3) contains an interview with Donald Knuth and includes a
discussion of his series, The Art of Computer Programming. The
7-volume idea is a plan which arose from the fact that Knuth had
written far too much material to have published in 1 or 2 volumes.
He has nearly completed Vol. 4, "Combinatorial Algorithms," which
will have companion volumes, 4A and 4B, to cover the unexpected
amount of extra material.
-Francine
------------------------------
Date: 7 Nov 82 13:43:44 EST (Sun)
From: Mark Weiser
Subject: Re: Parallelism and AI
Just to mention another project, The CS department at the University
of Maryland has a parallel computing project called Zmob. A Zmob
consists of 256 Z-80 processors called moblets, each with 64k
memory, connected by a 48 bit wide high speed shift register ring
network (100ns/shift, 25.6us/revolution) called the "conveyer
belt". The conveyer belt acts almost like a 256x256 cross-bar since
it rotates faster than a z-80 can do significant I/O, and it also
provides for broadcast messages and messages sent and received by
pattern match. Each Z-80 has serial and parallel ports, and the
whole thing is served by a Vax which provides cross-compiling and
file access.
There are four projects funded and working on Zmob (other than the
basic hardware construction), sponsored by the Air Force. One is
parallel numerical analysis, matrix calculations, and the like (the
Z-80's have hardware floating point). The second is parallel image
processing and vision. The third is distributed problem solving
using Prolog. The fourth (mine) is operating systems and software,
developing remote-procedure-call and a distributed version of Unix
called Mobix.
A two-moblet prototype was working a year and half ago, and we hope
to bring up a 128 processor version in the next few months. (The
boards are all PC'ed and stuffed but timing problems on the bus are
temporarily holding things back).
------------------------------
Date: Saturday, 6 November 1982 14:15-PST
From: Jonathan Alan Solomon
Subject: TOMORROW'S CHILDREN
Hi Hank,
Yes, computers (and modern technology) are being accepted and
integrated into today's society, but I think this generation (i.e.
yours and mine) are more readily able to handle *new* technology
than our parents were, and certainly my parents are more adaptable
than their parents were, not just more willing to accept Computers.
By placing computers alongside Telephones and Televisions, as new
technology requiring a new generation to accept them, you seem to be
regulating the flow of technology at a time when new technologies
and lifestyle changes are happening at a rate which is faster than
it has ever happened before. New things will come out and will
demand less than a generation to become accepted. Bottlenecks
already occur in society when technology comes in, but we are
learning to overcome them. Look at how long it took us to accept the
fact that the world was round?
Computers are being accepted on all generation levels. People are
becoming less and less fearful of being "reeducated" whenever
something new comes out. The concept of "You must unlearn what you
have learned" (Yoda, in Star Wars-TESB) is becoming very popular
with people of all ages. I find it really intense to see my
Grandfather accepting Computers (his ability to learn them is not
SEVERELY limited by his age), his children, and his Grandchildren.
But fears are there - change is always frightening - but people are
learning to face their fears, and change and grow with the world
around them.
New Technology is coming out faster these days than it has ever
before. Your own words ("I wonder what's next.") sums it up for most
of us, for people of all ages. We are all anxious to see what comes
around the horizon. We all want to reach for the stars, and the
luxury of a Generation-long wait to have these things become
accepted is rapidly becoming and old fashioned idea. More and more
people are learning the fundamental lesson of history - that the
"definitions" of life which we are accustomed to are merely
convenient explanations warranting further understanding, and more
importantly, we are accepting change when it happens!!!
Profoundly yours,
[--JSol--]
------------------------------
Date: 5 Nov 1982 0826-PST
From: Lincoln Hu
Subject: Video games: serious business?
COLUMBIA'S FIRST VIDEO-GAMES DAY
Most people associate video games with white-knuckled, sweating kids
whose only goals is to destroy one more wave of invaders. Is this a
fad or the emergence of a synergy between technology and art similar
to the advent of cinema 100 years ago? The computer science
department of Columbia University and Atari Research are sponsoring
a one-day program featuring speakers from the game industry who will
explore this question. Topics include where video games are going,
alternatives to violence in games, and video games as art and as
educational tools.
The seminar is free with no advanced registration required and the
public is encouraged to attend. Arcade, home and educational video
games will be available for play. Group attendance should be
arranged through Julie Kenter at Atari Research, 1196 Borregas Ave,
Box 427, Sunnyvale, CA 94086. (408) 745-0510.
The program includes:
9:30 Registration
10:00 Welcome
10:15 Steven Mayer: "The Ultimate Video Game"
11:30 Christopher Cerf: "Adventure Games: Fact and Fiction"
12:30 Lunch break
Games available for play
1:30 Christopher Crawford: "Computer Games: Art and Education"
2:45 Warren Robinnet: "Electricity is Orange: Teaching Kids
Digital Logic"
3:45 Reception
Games available for play
The guest speakers have a wide range of interests and a variety of
backgrounds. Steve Mayer leads a lab responsible for the
development of advanced products for Atari. He was the chief
inventor of Atari's home video game system as well as the Atari 400
and Atari 800 home computer systems.
As a creative consultant with knowledge of computers and a love for
toys of all kinds, Chris Cerf focuses his work in the information
and entertainment industries. Chris has worked with Random House,
Jim Henson Associates, the National Lampoon, Fisher-Price toys, and
the Children's Television Workshop on Sesame Street.
Chris Crawford manages the Games Research Group at Atari and is
writing a book on computer game design. He has written numerous
games and simulations and is actively shaping the future of games at
Atari.
Warren Robinnet is one of the founders of The Learning Company and
is working to educate children in ways that need not be dull.
Before starting TLC, Warren worked in the trenches of the industry
designing games for home video systems.
Participants should assemble on the fifteenth floor of the School of
International Affairs on the campus of Columbia University at 9:30am
on Friday, December 3, 1982. Columbia University is located in the
City of New York at 116th Street and Broadway.
[I was asked to forward this message onto the net and hit the
broadest audience possible by the program organizers here at
Columbia CSD. I take no responsibility for its content. Inquiries
can best be answered by Julie Kenter at Atari Research. /Linc.]
------------------------------
Date: 8 Nov 1982 0513-EST
From: EGK at MIT-OZ at MIT-MC (Edjik)
Subject: Re: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #101
Re: signatures.
I have been ending my personal corrispondance for a bout a year and
a half thusly:
0
+ @ + @ +
\ * | * /
% + -- EGK -- + %
/ * | * \
+ @ + @ +
0
------------------------------
Date: 8 Nov 82 19:20:37-EST (Mon)
From: Simply Ron Natalie
Subject: Distinctive Signatures?
The User-Specified "From" line is a feature of the SEND program from
UDel's MMDF package. The user is allowed to specify it through a
file called ".signature" in his directory. Credit for the "Hi
There" message must go to Will Martin, he had done it first when he
first discovered the Custom From Field feature.
Speaking of weird mail headers, here is one. Note the customized
"From" line and also the "Phase-Of-Moon" as well as the signature.
From: The One and Only Mijjil {Matthew J Lecin}
To: PROTOCOLS at Rutgers
Subject: Sperry Univac V77 600 Series Machines, anyone?
Reply-To: Lecin at Rutgers
Phase-Of-Moon: FM+6D.19H.40M.59S.
...
{M}
R. E. Mass signed his letter with something that would be quite a
devastating statement had he been on a UNIX system:
RM(*)
(The command "rm *" means remove all files in this directory.)
But I think the Customized From line award must go to the one that
appears on every UNIX-Wizards mailing list letter:
Remailed-from: the tty of Geoffrey S. Goodfellow
which I makes me feel like submitting a letter to that list with the
following "From" line:
From: The Geoff Goodfellow Remailing of Ron Natalie
Simply,
-Ron
------------------------------
End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************
From: Pleasant@Rutgers (Pleasant@Rutgers)
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #103
Newsgroups: fa.human-nets
Date: 1982-11-10 04:56:21 PST
HUMAN-NETS Digest Wednesday, 10 Nov 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 103
Today's Topics:
Technology - WorldNet (3 msgs),
Computers and People - Atari vs "Blue" Games (2 msgs) &
Cable TV and the First Amendment &
Magazines vs. Mailing Lists (2 msgs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 7 Nov 1982 1102-PST
From: CAULKINS at USC-ECL
Subject: Amateur Packet Radio
I agree with recent HN comment; packet radio is a good vehicle for
WORLDNET. I think that this kind of packet radio should be modeled
after citizen's band and not Amateur Radio; I believe the latter is
too restrictive in requiring a lot of technical expertise not needed
for WORLDNET access.
Anyway, some of the best work I know of in this area is being done
in Canada, fostered and supported by the Canadian equivalent of the
FCC. Some pointers:
The Vancouver Amateur Digital Communications Group
818 Rondeau Street
Coquitlam, B .C.
Canada V3J5Z3
[Digression - note superior design of Canadian zip]
They publish "The Packet", a newsletter - subscription is $10; also
kits for their hardware and floppies with supporting software for
prices ranging from $15 to $150.
In the US:
AMRAD
c/o Dr. William Pala, WB4NFB
5829 Parakeet Drive
Burke, VA 22015
Membership - $15; includes monthly "AMRAD Newsletter" largely
devoted to packet radio. Proceedings of the recent "ARRL Amateur
Radio Computer Networking Conference" available for $8 (repro +
mailing).
------------------------------
Date: 7 November 1982 20:09-EST
From: Robert Elton Maas
Subject: Re: Why not AT&T for WorldNet?
AT&T has a fine voice telephone network covering most of North
America, but they don't yet have digital communications that allow
me to connect my microcomputer into the network for hours on end
every day for a charge comparable to rental on a pair of modems and
a mile of twisted pair from my home to the local CO (Central Office)
plus a reasonable charge proportional to the data I send. If and
when they do provide such a network, with all the services I expect
(electronic mail, file transfer, virtual-terminal-circuits (what we
call TELNET)), then I think I'd be glad to use the AT&T network. But
they haven't even started to provide that level of service as far as
I know. Thus we're forced at the present time to do one of two
things:
(1) Use AT&T for the basic long-haul voice-grade circuit but adding
our own modems and software on top of it (PCNET, DIALNET, CSNET,
UUCP)
(2) Lease our own long-haul lines or satellite circuits or radio
channels independent of AT&T and also develop the software (ARPANET,
TYMNET, TELENET, packet radio).
Local networks have different tradeoffs. Leased or owned equipment
being quite practical as an alternative to AT&T (ETHERNET).
Local networks and isolated personal computers/workstations,
connected to each other by some combination of long-haul networks,
seems to be the consensus. Within that basic consensus the debate
continues...
------------------------------
Date: 8 Nov 1982 at 0938-PST
Subject: Re: AT&T
From: chesley.tsca at SRI-Unix
"Everybody hates the phone company."
--From the movie The President's Analyst
------------------------------
Date: 15 Oct 1982 2311-PDT
Subject: "We just couldn't see adults playing with spaceships
Subject: anymore."
From: the tty of Geoffrey S. Goodfellow
Reply-to: Geoff at SRI-CSL
a243 1643 15 Oct 82
AM-Atari-Blue Games,450
Atari Files Suit To Halt Blue Games
SUNNYVALE, Calif. (AP) - Atari Inc., a leading manufacturer of
home video equipment, announced Friday it had taken legal action
against sex-theme games created for use on Atari consoles.
''Atari, like the general public, is outraged by this conduct
and we are taking the initiative by filing this suit,'' said Michael
Moone, president of Atari's consumer electronics division.
Moone didn't give specifics about the legal action in a brief
news release, and Atari spokeswoman Karen Esler declined to
elaborate.
Atari said it was taking action against the manufacturer of the
game cartridges, American Multiple Industries, and the distributor,
Mystique.
''This is the first I've heard of it,'' said Michael Weingart, a
vice president for American Multiple, who otherwise declined to
comment.
The controversial games were unveiled Wednesday by American
Multiple, headquartered in Northridge. The cartridges sell for
$49.95 each.
The release of the games prompted a demonstration Friday in New
York City by about 100 people from a woman's group and a group of
American Indians. One of the three games, ''Custer's Revenge,'' was
on display at an audio-visual show there.
Kristen Reilly of Women Against Pornography said the game, in
which Custer crosses an obstacle course to engage in sex with an
Indian woman, is one of ''attack and rape.''
Michael Bush of the American Indian Community House said the
game provides ''a reinforcement of the stereotyping of American
Indians as something less than human.''
The game's creator, Joel Miller, denied in an interview in New
York that Custer rapes the woman. ''He's seducing her, but she's a
willing participant.''
Stuart Kesten, president of American Multiple, said he does not
consider the games pornographic and won't withdraw them. Reached in
New York before the announcement of the suit but after Atari had
complained about the games, Kesten said, ''We just couldn't see
adults playing with spaceships anymore.''
The games will be available nationally within two weeks, and he
expects a half-million will be sold by Christmas, he said.
Atari, a subsidiary of Warner Communications, said it ''does not
condone or approve of this use of its home video game technology,
which was designed for wholesome family entertainment.''
The games are the first offered by American Multiple, a year-old
company whose only business until recently was the manufacture of
plastic video and audio cassette storage cases.
American Multiple's are the first known adult games created for
use on Atari equipment.
ap-ny-10-15 1936EDT
***************
------------------------------
Date: 18-Oct-82 13:04:20 PDT (Monday)
From: Newman.es at PARC-MAXC
Subject: Re: Racist Atari video games
While I sympathize with the protests of women and Native Americans
against these racist and sexist video games, I fail to understand
the merits of Atari's suit.
What right does a hardware manufacturer have to prevent someone from
selling any kind of software to run on his hardware?
/Ron
------------------------------
Date: 26 October 1982 03:44-EDT
From: Robert Elton Maas
Subject: home censoring of television
Ideally a computer should be tied into a network that distributes TV
logs, so the program can match time slot against program name even
when last-hour changes are made due to long sports games or
emergency news broadcasts. The parents can mark which programs are
acceptable and which aren't for their children to watch (or for
themselves too), and whenever a new program not yet marked is listed
in the TV log it shows up in a menu for the parents to mark at the
earliest convenient time. Initially all scheduled programs would be
in the menu, but gradually most of them would become marked as OK or
NOT-OK for the children to watch, leaving only new shows and
specials unmarked and thus in the menu. The children would have
their own menu which showed only those shows marked as
OK-for-children in the parent's menu. If the children were allowed
only a certain number of hours per week viewing, the menu would
allow optimal choice so the children wouldn't miss their favorite
programs due to miscalculating the number of hours accumulated and
consuming their allocation on a less-favorite program. The children
could even have a favorite program recorded automatically if it came
on too late at night or during school or when the family was out
together. This would reduce hassles over "we can't go out tonight
because the children's favorite program is on tonight".
The only major problem (besides the fact that neither the
computer-controlled VCR/tuner nor the TV-guide-network is yet
available for consumers) would be that if parents are away the
children can visit a friend's house to consume their allocation of
TV hours then bring their friends home to consume their own
allocation, and thus get double allocation, or triple, etc., limited
only by the number of children who can fit in a room and want to
watch the same program and the number of hours the parents are away.
------------------------------
Date: 29 October 1982 12:11-EDT
From: Robert Elton Maas
Subject: Magazine vs. mailing list
On the Arpanet there's a smooth continuum from free-for-all mailing
list to edited magazine. Mostly the submitter can't tell the
difference. Mail to HUMAN-NETS is edited for spelling and format,
and individual messages are collected and rearranged and released in
coherent subject-specific clumps. Some messages may wait a few weeks
to get published if there aren't enough mates to create an issue (of
the magazine) and the message isn't of crucial importance deserving
immediate distribution. WORK-STATIONS has some editing. SPACE goes
out thru a fully-automated process. Although the mailing list is
private, no human sees the messages before they go out, so it's as
if it were just a mailing list except for the digestification and
nighttime distribution to reduce prime-time network load. INFO-PCNET
is a direct mailing list not even digestified. Some mailing lists
change their status from direct to digestified or back without the
members even being notified ahead of time. Except for the mechanism
involved I don't see a clear distinction between a digestified
mailing list and a magazine. If subscribers to the mailing list pay
for their incoming messages containing issues of the "magazine", and
submitters pay only for their original submission message (this may
be practical if the magazine is via selected retrieval rather than
en masse data, i.e. the subscriber gets the table of contents
automatically and the individual articles only on demand from the
local electronic newsstand), then the same ambiguity between mailing
list and magazine may exist in WorldNet.
------------------------------
Date: 29 Oct 1982 1404-EDT
Subject: Re: Magazine vs. mailing list
From: DDEUTSCH at BBNA
I can't tell if we are agreeing or not. The sender of a message to
a discussion group or edited magazine must know where to send the
message; the recipient of a message from a discussion group or
edited magazine must be allowed to know where it came from. The
difference between a discussion group and a magazine is that the
magazine has an editor who controls what is published, its form, and
when it is published.
Here's the most general diagram I can think of right now:
Writer --> Editor --> Publisher --> Recipients
The Editor may select or edit submissions; the publisher does the
actual fan-out. Sometimes there is no editor; sometimes the editor
is also the publisher. An unmediated discussion group that uses a
mail-forwarder to fan out mail without any screening doesn't have an
editor. MsgGroup is an example of that. If someone fans out his
own submission, there is no editor or publisher. If the writer is
not performing fan-out himself, the only thing he needs to know is
the name of the person or process to which the message should be
sent. That person or process might be an editor, a publisher, or
might switch between the two. It doesn't matter as long as the name
stays the same.
Given that the reader is not actively involved in retrieving
articles or magazines, the question of who pays for the
transmissions initiated by the publisher is dictated by the
agreement between the publisher and the recipient, and the ability
of the relevant protocols to support that agreement. I would be
hesitant to subscribe to a service that would indiscriminately send
me messages for which I would have to pay the communications cost.
If there were an editor, I would be more likely to subscribe under
those conditions. I suggest that if there is no editor, the writer
should pay for sending all the copies; if there is an editor then
the writer should pay for sending one copy to the editor, and who
pays for the final fan-out depends on the nature of the magazine.
Debbie
------------------------------
End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************
From: Pleasant@Rutgers (Pleasant@Rutgers)
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #106
Newsgroups: fa.human-nets
Date: 1982-11-23 00:20:34 PST
HUMAN-NETS Digest Monday, 22 Nov 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 106
Today's Topics:
Publications - The Sholes Keyboard,
Technology - Ergonomic Design,
Computers and People - Video Games &
Cable TV and the First Amendment (3 msgs) &
Communications Breakthrough (3 msgs) &
Food for Thought - Communicate with a Turing Machine
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: vivace!rba.allegra at BRL-BMD
Date: 14 Nov 82 20:44:00 EST (Sun)
I thought human-nets readers might be interested in an article by
Don Norman and Diane Fisher that was just published in \Human
Factors/ (vol 24, pp. 509-519). They compared several different
keyboard layouts, and they found
That the Sholes [QWERTY] keyboard actually seems to be a
sensible design, superior to all of the alphabetical
arrangements we have studied, and only 5 to 10% slower than the
Dvorak keyboard,...
As is well known, letters which are frequently typed together are
separated on the Sholes keyboard. This turns out to be an advantage
since key strokes from alternate hands are faster than key strokes
from the same hand. Furthermore, they conclude
Our lesson is simply this: Do not waste time rearranging the
letter arrangement of the existing standardized keyboard.
Bob Allen
------------------------------
Date: 19 Nov 1982 1151-PST
From: UCLA-DESIGN at USC-ISIB
Subject: The physical side
Hello Human-netters!
GOOD NEWS.
The Office Environments Project of the UCLA Design Research Group
was created in July of this year specifically to address the
physical issues related to workstation design and effective office
planning. Its one thing to identify the many factors associated
with improving this work environment--and quite another to come up
with viable solutions and alternatives. We would like your input.
What are some improvements or alternatives to existing VDT design,
workstation furniture, lighting, seating, planning, storage,
communicating et al? We are aware that some issues are far greater
than simple "ergonomic" modifications in creating a more stress-free
and effective environment. What works well for you? What would you
like to see? What changes would you make if you could? What other
factors besides the physical work environment contribute to your
"getting things done and feeling good about it?"
The project is subcontracted by ARPA via the USC Information
Sciences Institute of Marina Del Rey. It consists of faculty and
graduate students from the colleges of Design and Architecture at
UCLA. Please direct any suggestions, comments, or questions to us
at . I look forward to hearing from you.
Good day,
Tom Capalety
------------------------------
Date: 15 Nov 1982 1733-EST
From: Larry Seiler
Subject: Atari Games
There is (at least) one way in which Atari could legally restrict
the games that are produced for its machines. If (repeat, if) Atari
obtained a patent for their cartridge/machine interface, then anyone
who wants to use that interface must get a license from Atari, or
else be liable to lawsuit. I doubt that they did get a patent, or
else they wouldn't have to mention indecency in the suit. And while
there may not be anything in the Atari cartridge interface that is
patentable, most computer companies patent their bus architecture
when they come out with a new machine. That way, they can make a
(deserved) profit on the add-ons that other people manufacture. Or
close down people who make add-ons, if they choose (and if they are
willing to go to court on it).
Larry
------------------------------
Date: 16-Nov-82 10:39:13 PST (Tuesday)
From: Suk at PARC-MAXC
Subject: Re: TV and censorship
I am personally against TV censorship, ESPECIALLY with
regards to children. Children shouldn't be sheltered from
the seedier and less pleasant parts of life; if they don't
learn about things when they're little, they get into a
great deal of hassles when they're older.
You'd better censor the things your kids watch -- they're liable to
see something good or decent when you're not peeking over their
shoulder!
Stan Suk (-: _(smiling from the right?)
P.S. Are you really serious?
------------------------------
Date: 17 Nov 1982 0023-PST
From: Lynn Gold
Subject: Re: TV and censorship
1) I neither have children nor intend to have them.
2) Yes, I'm serious. Coming from a "Moral Majority"-type
household where words like "F%&k" were never used into a rough
school in a rough neighborhood can lead to very painful results.
--Lynn
------------------------------
Date: 18 Nov 1982 1957-EST
From: Rachel Silber
Subject: Re: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #104
From: Lynn Gold
Subject: TV and censorship
I am personally against TV censorship, ESPECIALLY with
regards to children. Children shouldn't be sheltered from
the seedier and less pleasant parts of life; if they don't
learn about things when they're little, they get into a
great deal of hassles when they're older.
I am opposed to adults censoring television, or any other medium, on
the "behalf" of other adults. However, there are more reasons for
censoring a child's television viewing than simply protecting the
child from unfortunate realities. For one thing, we assume that
adults are protective enough of their own interests that they will
not be overly manipulated by advertising that is against those
interests. I don't believe that the same assumption can be made
for a five year old being bombarded with messages to want toys
(which are often not as attractive in life as they are on the
screen) and candy (which is nutritionally bad).
Secondly, there are the possible educational effects of allowing
children to watch a lot of television. TV is, except in RARE
instances, a completely passive medium. It conditions them to
expect to "learn" by sitting back, being amused, and having an
attention span of a very few minutes.
Third, one does not have to be a "moral majority cretin" to object
strenuously to the values pushed by commercial television. For
example, the sitcom, The Facts of Life, was pretty blatant about
selling sex (and not even so much sex itself as the whole game of
pretending to be something one is not to please a boyfriend) to
junior high aged kids. I found the show to be offensive. One
can't watch very much television without running into stereotypic
portrayals of both men and women. If parents believe that part of
their job is to provide a value system for their children (I phrased
this carefully : I do not mean "force a value-system on their
children", I mean "provide them a model for ethical adult
behavior") then if they allow their children to watch any old thing
without guidance or comment, they are, at the very least sending a
double message.
Last, while I don't think there is much to be said for
over-protecting kids, given that one has a choice, most parents
would prefer to introduce the harsh realities of life in some
controlled way, and in a way that can be understood by a kid
without being frightening or over his/her head. TV takes away this
control.
Myself, I've got no TV and no kids either. When and if I ever have
both, I think it is my responsibility to at least be aware of what
they watch, and try to counteract the harm that will be done.
Rachel Silber
------------------------------
Date: 15 Nov 1982 11:42:37-EST
From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX
Subject: re [tone-of-voice in graphics]
I ran across a variant of this some 20 years ago in, of all
places, READER'S DIGEST; the symbol -) was used to mark
tongue-in-cheek comments. For clarity I expanded it to ( -), with
(occasionally) ( - ) (less bulky on a typewriter with a half-space
key) for serious material; this prompted one punster to suggest
(- -) for treachery.
------------------------------
Date: 18 November 1982 08:58-EST
From: Robert Elton Maas
Subject: Communications Breakthrough -- sideways facial pictures
This may be a dumb question <-) but how do I remember which way to
turn my head? Also, it doesn't matter which way I turn my cap falls
off. Couldn't you find a way to add those digital comments in the
normal vertical orientation?
/\
/ \
/ \
--------
( O O )
!( .. )!
!!( -- )!!
!! wwww !!
!!/ ww \!!
/----/ \----\
! !
! ! ! !
(Yeah, I know, you can't tell whether that hair is exactly shoulder
length or is longer but hidden from view, and the cap isn't tall
enough.)
------------------------------
Date: 20 Nov 1982 0109-EST
From: Andrew Scott Beals
Subject: someone otta keep track of ``communications breakthrough''
thingies. (i.e. @= for nuclear war messages)
or at least the new ones should be posted to HN -- i'd like to have
as full of a list as possible. it's been more than once that i've
been burned for losing humor in my messages...
-andy |-> (late night)
------------------------------
Date: 12 Nov 82 13:06-EST (Fri)
From: Steven Gutfreund
Subject: Communicate with a Turing machine
At last night's meeting of the cognitive science group at UMASS
Glenn Iba and Dave Mcdonald presented an interesting proposition:
Turing Machines are not good models of the kind of behavior that one
can get from a computer, since it is incapable of interacting with
the real-world in real-time.
Any description of the activities of a computer, should include that
of its user and the environment it contains. But this sort of
simulation of the real-world (thermodynamics, dissipative
structions, etc.) cannot be achieved in the simple model of a turing
machine, unless you claim that all possible future events are
encoded on the input tape, for the turing machine to compute on.
Somehow, the generating of this prophetical tape is less that
satisfying.
Thoughts?
------------------------------
End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************
From: Pleasant@Rutgers (Pleasant@Rutgers)
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #107
Newsgroups: fa.human-nets
Date: 1982-11-28 01:37:46 PST
HUMAN-NETS Digest Saturday, 27 Nov 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 107
Today's Topics:
Query - English Interface,
Programming - Unix,
Computers and People - Cable TV and the First Amendment (3 msgs),
Technology - Supercomputer Project
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 25 November 1982 04:02-EST
From: Robert Elton Maas
Subject: English interface
A few months ago I sent out a query for parsers for English. Now I
have a slightly different query. Has anybody developed a unified
parser and un-parser (generator) system that runs from a single
grammar instead of a separate grammar in each direction?
------------------------------
Date: 24 Nov 1982 at 0912-PST
Subject: The trouble with Unix
From: zaumen at SRI-TSC
... or how the TAB key deleted all my files (in one directory).
Some time ago there was some discussion about the Unix
user-interface. Here is an example of what can happen, even if you
are reasonable proficient with Unix. The example given below is not
typical of my use of this operating system, but...
Recently, I tried to type the following sequence of Unix shell
commands:
rm ^U for i in *
do
echo $i
cp $i $i.s
done
^U (control U) is what my tty driver uses to cancel the line, so the
first line in this command should be just "for i in *". What, one
might ask, does the TAB key have to do with this? Well, the tab key
is also ^I. My typing is a bit klutzy, and I hit ^I instead of ^U:
these keys are next to each other. I also wasn't paying attention
as well as I should have been. The Shell interpreted what I
actually typed as
rm for i in *
and responded with
rm: for not found
rm: i not found
rm: in not found
Alas, * expands to all files in the current directory, and rm
removed all of them.
Moral of the story: EVERYONE makes mistakes. Anyone reading a Unix
command that starts with
rm for i in *
would guess that there was a typo, and command parsers, shells, etc.
should have a syntax that allows such errors to be detected before
the commands are executed.
__________
/ \
| - - |
(| /\ |)
| |
\ /\/\/\ / <==== ( arghhhhhhhh )
\ /
------
Bill
------------------------------
Date: 23 Nov 82 11:52:32 EST (Tue)
From: Mark Weiser
Subject: Children
Being a parent is a soul-shattering experience which changes anyone
who tries it. I do not say it is bad (I happen to think it is
wonderful)--but one cannot stay the same afterwards. I always read
comments by people without children about child-raising with
amusement. If they only knew what they would really be like as
parents... It is like a non-programmer talking trying to talk to a
hacker about computers.
(~= flame on:)
Children are our investment in the future. If everything else was
lost, but we still had children, there would be some hope. But with
all the luxuries in the world, life would be pointless with no
children to continue the mysterious journey of intelligence through
the universe. There is NOTHING more important than the care and
feeding of children (which doesn't mean that everyone should do it,
any more than we all depend on farmers but not everyone must
farm--but only people with children should be allowed to vote).
(.= flame off.)
------------------------------
Date: 25 Nov 82 2:30:01-EDT (Thu)
From: Randall Gellens
Subject: Re: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #106
Regarding your comments [HN V5 #106] about children and tv in
general, and censoring TV for kids in particular...Wow! I couldn't
agree more or have put it better.
(Of course, the fact that don't have kids and see very little TV
[Sitcom: "Facts of Life?" Wazzat?] might have something to do with
it.)
--randall
------------------------------
Date: 26 November 1982 06:49-EST
From: Jerry E. Pournelle
Subject: Re: TV and censorship
Think of it as evolution in action.
------------------------------
Date: Thursday, 25 Nov 1982 19:17-PST
Subject: news clipping: "Supercomputer" project
From: lauren at RAND-UNIX
n043 1152 24 Nov 82
BC-SUPERCOMPUTER
(Newhouse 002)
BUILDING THE MIND OF MAN INTO A MACHINE
By PATRICK YOUNG
Newhouse News Service
BOSTON - Stephen Grossberg envisions nothing less than building
the mind of man into a machine.
He is not alone in dreaming of creating super-smart computers
with humanlike powers of thought and reason. But Grossberg is
approaching the task from a different prospective than most others
who labor in the high-tech world of artificial intelligence.
In nearly 25 years of research into the intricate physical
workings of the mind, Grossberg has evolved a series of mathematical
equations to explain brain activity. These equations, he believes,
can be used to write programs that will enable computers to think.
The eventual results, he hopes, will include robots with the
impressive powers of R2-D2 and C-3PO, the robotic duo of ''Star
Wars'' fame.
''An intelligent robot must be able to adjust it parameters and
adapt,'' says Grossberg, professor of mathematics, psychology and
biomedical engineering at Boston University. ''That means making the
computer more flexible so it can reprogram itself.''
Robots run by such advanced computers could carry out tasks too
dirty or dangerous for humans.
''These jobs might include working in poisonous atmospheres,
inside nuclear reactors or mining precious metals from the Asteroid
Belt between Mars and Jupiter,'' Grossberg says. ''The first
intelligent creature from Earth to explore another planet might not
be human at all. It might be one of our electronic progeny.''
But first there is the matter of money to develop the computer,
which Grossberg is trying to raise, and the Japanese.
Backed by funds from their government, two Japanese research
teams have embarked on a 10-year effort to build a computer with
''man-level intelligence'' that will be able to learn, think, read,
write and speak.
There is no comparable effort in the United States, although a
number of researchers in universities and industry continue to
pursue the goal of creating a computer with artificial intelligence.
The Japanese have said such an machine will require new computer
mathematics. And their description sounds to Grossberg suspiciously
like the type of equations he has developed and refined with the
aide of colleagues at Boston University's Center for Adaptive
Systems.
Today's computers, though capable of lightning-fast calculations
and storing vast amounts of information, are stupid. They don't
think; they only follow the instructions programmed into them.
This is true even of the most sophisticated units, the so-called
expert systems.
By drawing on certain scientific principles and the collected
experiences and learning of experts stored in their memories, expert
systems can do such things as diagnose medical problems and predict
the location of mineral deposits. But they don't learn from
experience and they don't reason in a human sense.
Grossberg's goal is to build a computer that will monitor its
environment and change its behavior to adapt to changing conditions.
He didn't start out to create to artificial intelligence or
build a super-smart computer.
His work has concentrated on understanding the interaction of
mind and matter - how the physical brain, through the chemical and
electrical activity of its nerve cells, produces behavior.
''Our work is to try to understand and predict neural events, to
give a unified view of behavior and its underlying neural action,''
Grossberg says.
Memory, learning, thinking and the brain's other activities
depend on the complex interactions of a series of nerve cells. A
single nerve cell can be studied in detail to determine its
chemical, electrical and physiological changes.
But ''in terms of understanding behavior, the functional level
is not the single cell,'' Grossberg says.
Yet determining how the brain integrates the actions of
individual cells to produce a specific behavior has proved more
difficult.
''A pattern of activity across cells forms a pattern of
information,'' Grossberg says. ''The question is how does a whole
field of cells compute things that no single cell will ever know.''
What he has found, he says, ''is a few different principles that
occur over and over.'' And these can be reduced to mathematical
equations.
''That mathematical model is the bridge to going to a new
machine,'' Grossberg says. ''It's not just that you've got a wiring
diagram - the architecture of the brain - it's really the dynamics
of the system, the pharmacology and physiology.
''The question is what is the best and cheapest way to implant
this in hardware. It is a major problem that we haven't dealt with
yet.''
That effort - and perhaps a competitive race with the Japanese -
will come if Grossberg secures funds to develop his super-smart
computer.
------------------------------
End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************
From: Pleasant@Rutgers (Pleasant@Rutgers)
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #108
Newsgroups: fa.human-nets
Date: 1982-11-28 00:08:18 PST
HUMAN-NETS Digest Sunday, 28 Nov 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 108
Today's Topics:
Computers and People - Communications Breakthrough &
Computers in Education,
Technology - Combinations of Telephones and Terminals &
Keyboards & WorldNet
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 25 Nov 82 2:39:05-EDT (Thu)
From: Randall Gellens
Subject: Re: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #106
At one point in the dim, dark, past, we had a fairly active
notesfile system modelled after that on PLATO, but running on other
systems. People devised all sorts of hacks to compensate for the
lack of standard graphics/animation/ alternate fonts available on
PLATO terminals...changing the backspace character to a normal
character (?CHAR BS=^C for example) allowed it to be used at text,
which, combined with line-feeds, and escape sequences (these last
necessitated warnings about which terminal type to read a note on)
gave a fairly broad range of effects. (One I liked was a note that
had space-bs-char for every char, resulting in slow, halting
printing on (we used them then) DECwriters, and slower printing on
screens. A reply asked what baud rate the note had been entered
on).
A lot of terminals in use then xmitted screen control keys as well
as acting on them, which made it fairly easy to do animation.
------------------------------
Date: 26 Nov 1982 2305-MST
From: JW-Peterson at UTAH-20 (John W. Peterson)
Subject: Computers for school
Those of you who reacted to CMU's plans to require students to
purchase computers may be interested in this one:
The "World Institute for Computer Assisted Teaching" (better known
to WORKS readers as WICAT) currently has a proposal before the Utah
state board of Education asking the state of Utah invest $15 million
in Wicat, for them to develop a standard CAI system to be used in
most/all of Utah's public schools. The state would be the sole
owner of the program and receive the royalties (6% of the sales
commissions) on the software. According to the proposal "the
royalties would continue [at >$3 meg a year] for a 15-year period
... meaning the state fund would be fully reimbursed and the state
would receive $30 million for the hardware acquisition."
The courseware would include subjects such as "English, Writing,
Calculus, Biology, History and Foreign Languages (with Audio)."
These programs are to run on a "System 300 (the Hydra System)" that
has 30 terminals "with audio, graphics and animation" and a CPU with
an 80 meg disk. Price (w/ discount) is given at $67,000.
WICAT's proposal also states they would be willing to "translate"
the programs to other hardware vendors at the states option (the
state would pay extra for this service).
While the proposal does list some of the reservations about such a
move (such as WICAT's current marketing capability, and having one
company as a sole source), Utah's executive directory of
administrative services claims "there are strong, positive feelings
about WICAT's offer and it's potential role in assisting the State
of Utah to develop and utilize CAI materials."
The proposal is set to go before the '83 session of the Utah state
legislature. The source for the above quotes is a Utah State Office
of Education newsletter.
-jw peterson
------------------------------
Date: 16 Nov. 1982 4:11 pm PST (Tuesday)
From: NNicoll.ES at PARC-MAXC
Subject: Re: Combinations of Telephones and Terminals
Does anyone know of a touch tone phone where each of the twelve
keys, and combinations of same, emits a different tone. You can
type full ASCII with that combination (alphabet on request).
NNicoll
------------------------------
Date: 24 Nov 1982 22:20:03-EST
From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX
Subject: re the sholes keyboard
I'd be curious as to exactly what their claims were about hand
balance; my experience (and due to a publishing hobby I've done a
\lot/ of text typing) is that there are a significant fraction of
words typed almost entirely with the left hand (I think the Sholes
is supposed to call for left-hand strokes 56% of the time in stock
English). Certainly if you compare similar strokes(finger/direction)
for left and right hands, in most of the pairs the left-hand stroke
calls a much higher-frequency letter. Do they claim that this
contradicts other studies, in which the Dvorak was shown to be much
faster (perhaps also easier to learn)?
------------------------------
Date: 25 Nov 1982 2320-PST
Subject: The changing face of Micro-computing/effects on WorldNet
From: William "Chops" Westfield
Lauren's recent message about CPM 3.0 (to the info-cpm mailing list)
which, summarized, said CPM 3.0 will be nice for OEMs who are
producing a large number of identical systems, but not for much of
anyone else, served to further prompt me into writing this message.
Microcomputing is changing. Is it getting better or worse ?
Used to be, no two systems were alike. If you wanted to sell
software, it had to be configurable for just about anything. And
the people who bought it would have to know how to configure it.
Nowadays, things are a lot different. You can pick one of (apple,
radio shack, IBM, osborne), write software for it that won't run on
anything else, and if it's any good, you become rich. How will this
change the way people compute ?
For example, CPM remains about the only system for which lots of
USEFUL public domain software is available... People with other
systems pay for inferior products. Many people with CP/M will pay
for a product rather than use an equivalent Public domain program...
Why?
Example 2: products aimed at a very specific market are appearing.
For example, spelling correctors and thesarusses that run under
WordStar(tm). What about us Mince/Emacs people?
Example 3: PCNet is/was dedicated to the prospect of running a
common communications protocol on every possible system, so they
could all talk to each other. The idea was to put all of this in
the public domain. PCNet is having serious problems. the only
thing that might save them is that various large, diverse
organizations like SRI, DARCOM, NOSC, etc are willing to spend money
developing PCNet, cause they need their micros to talk to their
large computers. Meanwhile, programs like CrossTalk, which will do
file transfers only to other IBM PCs, has made the top 20 selling
programs for the IBM PC for the last several months.
The question is, I guess: Is the current proliferation of many
basically incompatible micro-computers going to hurt or help the
WorldNet concept?
BillW
------------------------------
End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************
From: Pleasant@Rutgers (Pleasant@Rutgers)
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #109
Newsgroups: fa.human-nets
Date: 1982-12-20 23:33:12 PST
HUMAN-NETS Digest Sunday, 19 Dec 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 109
Today's Topics:
Queries - Productivity of Word-Processors &
Integer Programming,
Announcements - VDT Survey Result &
Virginia Computer Users Conference & Computers and Weaving,
Programming - UNIX (6 msgs),
Computers and People - TV Censorship (2 msgs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 2 Dec 1982 1114-EST
From: KSPROUL at RUTGERS
Subject: Productivity of Word-Processors
Does anyone have or know of any reports or articles on the pros/cons
of having technical people using word-processors/text-editors and
such. We need to try to convince management that 'word-processing'
should NOT be restricted to just the secretaries. and that it IS
productive to let the scientist directly type stuff into the
computer.
Keith Sproul
Ksproul@Rutgers
------------------------------
Date: 13 Dec 1982 1030-PST
Subject: Integer Programming
From: BERTAPELLE at USC-ISIE
I am looking for information on programs that do integer programming
(a type of linear programming routine). The program will have to be
able to handle a large number of constraints (I'm not sure what
large means except a moderate to large number of constraints).
Thanks for the help,
Tony Bertapelle
------------------------------
Date: 5 December 1982 23:19-EST
From: V. Ellen Golden
Subject: VDT Survey Result
Blue Buttons, the Boston Globe "Chatter" who asked for a survey of
VDT users a while ago, has now responded with the results. As many
of you might have predicted, the results were not exactly
surprising. She decided in the end that a more scientific survey
was required. It is my suspicion that the responses of the Arpanet
community may have represented a majority of the "individual
responses" she mentions. This opens some interesting questions
about OTHER sorts of VDT using jobs. In any case, her reply is
available on MIT-MC as
ELLEN;VDT RESP
and may be FTP'd. And thank you from Blue Buttons to all of you who
took the time to reply.
------------------------------
Date: 10 December 1982 19:28 est
From: Jarrell.Advisor at M.PCO.LISD.HIS
Subject: Virginia Computer Users Conference
Reply-to: Jarrell.Advisor%PCO-Multics at MIT-MULTICS
The thirteenth annual Virginia Computer Users Conference
is being held on April 15-16, 1983. The topics are: Ada, Human
Factors, and Graphics (as an art-form) If you desire to speak, or
just wish to attend, please contact Luanne Melown, or Paula Brimer
at:
VCUC 13
Department of Computer Science
Virginia Tech
Blacksburg, Va 24061
Please do not reply to any of the above lists, as I am not a member
of any of them.
------------------------------
Date: 3 Dec 1982 1228-EST
From: Rachel Silber
Subject: Computers and Weaving (yes, really!)
A magazine for weavers and spinners, Handwoven (Interweave Press,
$15/yr), has begun a new column called "Interface". This column is
to be about the uses of computers for weavers. They plan to cover
topics ranging from things that seem pretty standard (eg, using a
computer to plan your studio/small business finances) to
applications that really are off the beaten path. For example,
there is a program commercially available that can convert
threading and tie-down patterns (a compact representation of what
you're going to do to the loom) to a drawdown (a diagram of what the
resulting cloth will look like). This is a really time consuming
thing to figure out by hand and graph paper, and a good, creative
application for a home computer. (I may have my weaving terms a
little confused; I'm very new to this hobby.) If memory serves, the
authors of the column are Carol and Stewart Strickler.
I have been in one home with a loom in one room and a computer in
the other, and know at least 2 people who re proficient at using
both. But I admit that I was surprised to find this column proposed
as a regular feature. The interest that I think this has for
Human-nets readers is simply to see what varied fields are making
use of computers, for what varied reasons. The paranoia-inspiring
view of computers taking over the world gets dealt a resounding blow
by this instance of people taking over computers.
Rachel Silber
------------------------------
Date: 30 Nov 82 03:52:04 EST (Tue)
From: Tim Curry
Subject: soft remove under unix
The potential hazard of accidental file loss under UNIX has
generated much debate in the past. Locally, our system programmer
came up with a reasonable solution to most complaints. Through some
aliasing and shell scripts, he redefined rm so that all files that
are removed during a session are actually just moved to a backup
directory. When you finally logout, it then really removes all
files under that backup directory. If you want to recover a
removed file, he had another script to restore the deleted file (as
long as the removed file was during your current session).
This entire process was quickly and easily implemented and is
selectably used by the user community (I personally don't use it but
I recognize its usefulness for those apprehensive of rm).
The point I wish to get across is that nearly every complaint (note
the qualifier and please don't flood me with exceptions!) that I
have heard people mention about UNIX's human interface (or UNIX in
general) can be quickly and easily altered to give the user what he
wants. UNIX is the only OS that I have used that I have been more
impressed with the better I get to know it. The human interface
takes on each user's personality to a degree. Of course (as with
any extensible system) it sometimes gets difficult to accomplish any
work on somebody elses account but my own account has been nicely
tuned to fit me. And it takes very little effort to get the account
tuned once the user gets slightly knowledgeable about the system.
I feel that the human interface of the sophisticated user is often
overlooked in attempting to get a system that is easy for beginners
to use. After all, if a computer is purchased, you should expect a
learning time for all users but those users who are on the computer
with any frequency can eventually be hindered by the simplicity of a
system. Also, I would also argue that the "apropos" and "man"
commands should be sufficient to help the new user get going at the
terminal (after a degree of pre-terminal reading). I certainly
don't consider UNIX the last word in OS but until something better
comes along, I'll keep my "I __ __
/ `' \
\ /
\ / UNIX" button displayed. (:-})
\ /
\/
Tim Curry
USENET: ucf-cs!tim
ARPANET: tim.ucf-cs@udel-relay
------------------------------
Date: 30 Nov 1982 1015-CST
From: Clyde Hoover
Subject: UNIX and sloppy typing
Expecting the UNIX shell (or any other command interpreter)
to provide useful capabilities (such as *, for, etc.) and still
protect you from your mistakes is flat out silly. You cannot blame
the system if YOU enter a bad command that blows you away. You want
hand-holding, use a TOPS-20 system.
------------------------------
Date: 30 Nov 82 08:13:26 EST (Tue)
From: Andrew Scott Beals
Subject: The trouble with Unix
it you want to turn the tab character off as a separator, just do
this:
$ IFS='
'
$
and now only space and newline will be field (read word) separators,
newline being a bit different (it's only used as a word separator
when you need to close off a command or quote or ')' or whatever.).
simple.
a number of people i know (everyone at work except for me) use the
DEL key when they want to wipe a line of input. -- of course, this
is usually VERY close to RETURN. oh well. it's more of a trouble
with the keyboard.
-andy :-)
p.s. if you still aren't happy, use ^X as your linekill -- it's not
near anything too dangerous (unless you have VERY fat fingers).
------------------------------
Date: 1 Dec 1982 at 0923-PST
Subject: Re: The trouble with Unix
From: zaumen at SRI-TSC
The editors I use (emacs or emacs look-a-likes) use to delete
the last character typed. I also use TOPS-20 occasionally, so its
nice to have ^U and ^C work similarly on both systems. Not using
tabs as a separator sounds like a nice idea. is right above
on my H19, and really looses as an interrupt character,
especially if you switch between Unix and TOPS-20 several times a
day, as I was during the last few months.
Bill
------------------------------
Date: 1 Dec 82 23:07:13 EST (Wed)
From: Andrew Scott Beals
Subject: DEL vs ^H
frankly, i don't know *why* there is all this usage of DEL as the
erase character. (yeech!) why use DEL over ^H? ^H is on the home
row (both control and H on a good keyboard, that is), so it's MUCH
easier to type. WHY?
------------------------------
Date: 2 Dec 1982 at 1056-PST
Subject: Re: DEL vs ^H
From: zaumen at SRI-TSC
It seems to be a convention on many systems. When in Rome, ...
Besides, naive users find "delete" easier to remember.
------------------------------
Date: 29 Nov 1982 0229-PST
From: Henry W. Miller
Subject: TV Censorship
I, too, am against censorship in all forms, unless it is for
the good of the population as a whole. (By that I mean facts that
really don't have to be known, as it would cause mass hysteria, etc.
But, this is the topic for another discussion...)
I grew up in the turbulent sixties. I don't know how many
times I saw the reply of the assassination of President Kennedy,
Senator Kennedy and Martin Luther King, likewise with the shooting
of Lee Harvey Oswald.
Remember the film clips from Vietnam? The riots in Watts
and Chicago and numerous other cities?
I think it taught me how valuable life is.
I grew up on a diet of the Three Stooges and Bugs Bunny.
The eye-gouging, face slapping, head bashing antics of the Howard
brothers and Larry Fine never encouraged me to try such tactics,
though I still roar with laughter when I see them in action. The
fact that Wyle E. Coyote got blown up, smashed, crushed many times
never made me imitate those actions. (Although, I remember the time
the stink bomb I was making literally blew up in my face, spewing
glass into me and throughout the kitchen. I never tried that stunt
again...)
I was severely disappointed by the way "Blazing Saddles" was
hacked when it was aired on national TV. It was cut so badly they
might as well not have shown it. Hell, if I want to watch a dozen
cowboys passing gas around the campfire, that's my right, isn't it?
One of my favorite movies, "Patton", faired better. The
first time on TV, they only cut 18 seconds from the movie . Only the
most offensive language and the shooting of the jackasses was taken
out. Still, I didn't appreciate it.
Anybody remember "Beany and Cecil?" For a "kids" show 20
years ago, it was light years ahead of its time. It made so many
adult references, like "No-Bikini Atoll". Even now, I still
remember, and just "get" certain of the punch lines. I haven't seen
the show in years. No one seems to be showing it.
Anybody seen "Hill Street Blues"? Whew!!! Some of the
references there are down right naughty.
And, in "Star Trek", remember how many times Kirk was shown
putting his boots back on after being with a young lady?
I happened to watch an old "I Love Lucy" a couple of days
back. Fred and Ethel were arguing again. Lucy told them to stop
it. Ethel said, "We can't, that's the way we make love." Yet, in
that same series, they couldn't say that Lucy was pregnant, but
merely "expectin'".
In the "Dick Van Dyke" show, as well as many others, the
couples were always shown as sleeping in separate beds. Why?
I guess I've covered both sides. It seems that censorship
has a double standard. What, or why, is still beyond me.
What I am getting at is that I don't feel that things should
be censored. If you don't like it, if it offends you, don't watch
it. Let the rest of us see what we want.
-HWM
------------------------------
Date: 5 December 1982 19:25-PST (Sunday)
From: Scott J. Kramer
Subject: Censoring?
I just read some of the comments concerning censorship of children's
TV watching and wanted to add something. It appears to me that many
young people are becoming nearsighted, more so than ever and that
this is partially due to their focusing for long periods on such
things as TV's, CRT's, books, blackboards, and other "close-in"
objects at an earlier age than in the past. This is something to
consider if you want to "censor" your child.
scott
------------------------------
End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************
From: Pleasant@Rutgers (Pleasant@Rutgers)
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #110
Newsgroups: fa.human-nets
Date: 1982-12-23 16:21:55 PST
HUMAN-NETS Digest Tuesday, 21 Dec 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 110
Today's Topics:
Technology - WorldNet &
Combinations of Telephones and Terminals &
Looming Technology (2 msgs),
Computers and People - Human Memory Capacity (5 msgs),
Queries - Studies on Window Usage,
News Article - Audio Response System
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 29 November 1982 01:14-EST
From: Robert Elton Maas
Subject: The changing face of Micro-computing/effects on WorldNet
I think when PCNET or other World-Net type of thing becomes
established, suddenly permitting FTP between all these incompatible
systems, there'll suddenly be a market to convert files from private
obscure cretinous formats (RSX-11M Files-11, IBM EBCDIC RECFM=FB,
and many others), and even some private good formats (NLS,
Hypertext/XANADU), various compressed forms of data (WYLBUR, Huffman
codes, my IRSM-encodings, etc.) and special-purpose data formats
(BASIC sourcefile, Scribe&TEX documents, etc.), into the standard
form (probably ANSI-ASCII making full use of
alternate-characterset-escape capabilities, or NBS/Postel structured
multimedia text/data). Somebody'll make a bundle writing all this
conversion software, then more money will be made modifying
operating systems to use the standard-format files directly instead
of requiring format-conversion. Eventually most computers will be
able to exchange files efficiently.
------------------------------
Date: 1 Dec 82 2:54:41-EST (Wed)
From: Ron Natalie
Subject: Touchtones
It isn't TouchTone (TM) if it isn't the standard dual tones that the
Genuine Bell stuff makes. Therefore you are limited to the 12 (or
16 in some specs) dual-tone combinations. However most phones allow
you hold two buttons down in the same row or column and get only the
common tone transmitted. This allows up to 19 (or 24 on 16 button
encoders) different one and two tone combinations. Holding down
more than two buttons or two buttons not in the same row or column
generates no tone. However, some phones, including the Bell Exeter
(available at your phone center) and some of the other Touchtone
Style (NOT GTE) phones from other manufactures ORs all the tones
together for all buttons held down simultaneously. All the possible
one and two button combinations would therefore yield 88
combinations, which would be usable for most of ASCII, and you could
use three button sequences for less used ones. Decoding is slightly
tricky, but cheaper to implement than having a different tone on
each key, cause you would only need 7 tone decoders rather than 12.
Don't forget in your design to allow for the fact that multiple
buttons will not be depressed and released simultaneously.
If all you want is letters and numbers, and just a few symbols there
are gizmos out to do this. I saw one designed by a grad student at
Johns Hopkins that used two button sequences to encode the letters.
The user on the other end could use a small device that either
output (switch selectable) either ASCII, 5-Bit code for Deaf TTYs,
or Morse Code. The thing was small enough that a deaf person who
new morse code could carry the thing around with him and use it with
any phone, not requiring the other party to know morse (the tone
sequences involved the location of the letters on the phones, with
the Q and Z imaginarily placed on the "1" button).
-Ron
------------------------------
Date: 20 Dec 1982 0930-PST
From: LAWS at SRI-AI
Subject: Computers and Weaving (yes, really!)
Karen Huff at Kansas State University developed a drawdown simulator
back in the very early 70's. Her minicomputer was an IBM 360, and
the plots came out on a CalComp.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 20 Dec 1982 12:35-PST
Subject: Looming technology
From: mike at RAND-UNIX
Its not so surprising that weavers should use computers to control
their looms. History fans will recall the impact that steam and
mechanical looms had in England during the industrial revolution.
Patterns were encoded in various mechanical ways for those devices,
now they probably use floppy disks.
------------------------------
Date: 18 Dec 1982 1458-EST
From: DANNY at MIT-OZ
Subject: Human Memory Capacity
Does anyone out there know of any estimates of human memory
capacity? That is, how many facts (or better yet bits) are stored in
the average human?
------------------------------
Date: 19 December 1982 0101-EST (Sunday)
From: Hans Moravec at CMU-CS-A (R110HM60)
Subject: Re: Human Memory Capacity
My amateur researches agree with the 10 trillion bits/human brain
figure. A survey article "The Molecular basis of Memory" by
Kandel&Schwartz, Science 29 Oct 1982 reviews the increasingly
conclusive evidence that all memory and learning, short and long
term, indeed takes place in the synapses. Short term memory is
mediated by varying concentration of a small molecule (tentatively
identified) in the synapse, that dissipates in time; long term by
migration of a large protein that stays lodged once it arrives.
There are great redundancies - I bet an efficient program could
make like a human with only one trillion bits. -- Hans
------------------------------
Date: Sunday, 19 December 1982 02:19-EST
From: MINSKY at MIT-MC
Subject: Human Memory Capacity
It might be good to ask Chase, at CMU. He's been doing that stuff
on people learning to remember long sequences (like 100 digits). My
impression is that he thinks these people can deposit "chunks" in
LTM at a rate of about 1 every three seconds or so.
This is impressive, but still within the old scale of fairly
conservative size: if you did 50,000 of them for 20,000 days you'd
get a billion.
By the way, "chunks" ought to be like address-connections. Instead
of bits, they might be routings or something.
------------------------------
Date: Sunday, 19 December 1982 13:50-EST
From: DANNY at MIT-MC
Subject: Human Memory Capacity
Here are some other interesting estimates I have collected over the
years:
Minsky (In Semantic Information Processing) estimates you use
100,000 to a 1,000,000 facts "for ordinary things". (Do you still
believe this Marvin?)
Von Neumann: 10^15 bits, he claims this comes from counting "the
impressions which a human being gets in life" or "other factors".
Luria: (in Mind of a Mnensist) claims the capacity of his subject
was "infinite".
-danny
------------------------------
Date: 19 Dec 1982 1427-PST
Subject: Re: Human Memory Capacity
From: ISAACSON at USC-ISI
Oh, well, if you actually collect these things, here is another one:
"The storage capacity of the human brain, namely a theoretical
maximum of a thousand million bits in a lifetime.... though there
can be few men who fill their memory to capacity..." [Source:
Intelligence Came First, E. Lester Smith (ed.), at p. 56. P.S. at
p.59-60 there is an interesting citation from an old paper by M.
Minsky]
-- JDI
------------------------------
From: "METOO::MILLER c/o"
Date: 6 DEC 1982 1347-EST
Subject: Studies on Window Usage
I would appreciate hearing from anyone on human-nets who is aware of
any on-going studies which are attempting to look at the following
(types of) questions:
1. Optimal arrangments of screen windows
by function being performed and relationships
among the information in the various
windows.
2. Optimal window sizes and structures.
3. Optimal number of co-existing windows.
4. Color relationships among co-existing
windows.
Written replies can be sent to:
Peter Miller
Digital Equipment Corporation
110 Spit Brook Road
Nashua, N.H. 03062
M/S: ZKO2-3/N30
Thanks,
--Peter
------------------------------
Date: 23 Nov 1982 0449-PST
Subject: Computer Operator.
From: the tty of Geoffrey S. Goodfellow
Reply-to: Geoff at SRI-CSL
a017 2328 22 Nov 82
PM-Computer Operator, Bjt,450
That Information Operator Is Inhuman
DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) - Telephone users who don't let their
fingers do the walking can hear a computer do the talking when they
call directory assistance here.
Northwestern Bell's new system lets a human operator take a
call, search a computer for the number requested and then hit a
button, putting the computer on line to read the area code and
number in a slow, female voice.
The electronic voice will then repeat the number and advise
callers to stay on the line if they have a question or need more
assistance.
Bell officials say the system, now handling 70 percent of the
information requests in Iowa, Nebraska and Indiana, saves about 5
seconds a call. In Iowa alone, Bell averages 150,000
directory-assistance calls a day.
Operators, who continue to handle emergency requests, say it
saves their voices.
''I like it,'' one operator in Iowa, where the system has been
used since Sept. 1, said Monday.
''I think it's all right myself,'' said another. ''It's no extra
work.'' The operators said they were not allowed to give their names
while on duty.
A supervisor, Joyce Lutz of Des Moines, said the system helps
operators because they ''don't have to talk quite as much. It's a
lot speedier.''
The computer voice, more formally known as the Audio Response
System, will be used in other states as soon as the equipment can
installed, said Ed Mattix, Northwestern Bell's media relations
manager.
''Only a very few have complained they can't understand the
voice,'' he said. ''Some people say they'd rather talk to a live
operator rather than a computer and I guess that's to be expected.
''Some people think computers are coming along and replacing
people, but you still have to have people servicing those computers,
working with them.''
He said operators can handle more calls more efficiently. ''The
most tedious part of their job was the repetition of the numbers.
This way, they can keep going and take more calls. They stay busier
and the time goes faster,'' he said.
Many people think the computer's voice, which Mattix described
as ''very understandable,'' comes from a tape recording. But it's
straight from a computer where it's generated by silicon chips.
Phone company policy allows callers to get two phone numbers
from directory assistance for each call. After receiving the first
number from the computer, the caller stays on the line and is
automatically referred back to an operator where the process is
repeated.
Mattix said the use of computer voice technology has only begun.
''We've just scratched the surface,'' he said. ''Next thing, we'll
be able to talk to computers rather than sitting at a computer
keyboard like we do now. It's really amazing.''
------------------------------
End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************
From: Pleasant@Rutgers (Pleasant@Rutgers) Search Result 114
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #111
Newsgroups: fa.human-nets
Date: 1982-12-31 03:14:26 PST
HUMAN-NETS Digest Thursday, 30 Dec 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 111
Today's Topics:
Administrivia - Head Crash at Rutgers,
Queries - Computers for the Blind &
MIT Hacker's Glossary,
Annoucements - A New List is Borne,
Programming - Unix (7 msgs),
Computers and People - Video Games (2 msgs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 29 Dec 1982 0028-EST
From: Pleasant at RUTGERS
Subject: Head Crash on Disks
If anyone submitted a message to Human-Nets on December 23rd or
later, please resend it to the list. Rutgers had a head crash on
one of its disk and we were forced to restore files from Thursday's
(23rd) full backup.
-Mel
------------------------------
Date: 28 Dec 1982 1159-EST
From: SOMMERS at RU-GREEN at RUTGERS
Subject: Computers and Blind Youth
Does anyone out there know of any studies on the use of
micros in educating blind students. Also, I am looking for any
information on micros and terminals set up for the blind (prices,
problems, what is available and from whom).
Thanks,
Liz Sommers
------------------------------
Date: 29 Dec 1982 0819-PST
Subject: Gweep Glossary
From: APAGE at USC-ISIE
After just reading a great issue of Time magazine (Jan 3, 1983 - The
Computer Moves In) and a feature article on page 39 titled "Glork!
A Glossary for Gweeps" I'm very interested in getting a copy (if
possible) of the hacker's dictionary. "Time" indicates that the
glossary has been "assembled by a network of hackers at M.I.T.,
Stanford and elsewhere", and I'm just hoping they are talking about
the ARPANET.
I also have created a file on-line of hacker jargon that I utilize
as a training aid with new users here in the ARPA environment, which
is growing rapidly from many users' inputs.
If anyone has heard of this glossary, I'd love to hear from you. If
not, please forward this message on to someone else that you think
might have an idea of who to contact.
cheers! arlene APAGE@USC-ISIE
------------------------------
Date: 28 Dec 1982 1245-PST
From: Henry W. Miller
Subject: A new list is borne...
A new list is being formed:
COMICS-LOVERS@SRI-NIC
This list will attempt to cover all aspects of of the
comics, a subsection that has been sorely neglected by SF-LOVERS (No
downplay on that list; it is merely that comics fans represent only
a small faction of that list.)
For the time being, this list will be an immediate
distribution list, although I can soon see it growing into a digest.
So, send your ideas to COMICS-LOVERS@SRI-NIC. If you wish
to subscribe, send then to COMICS-LOVERS-REQUEST@SRI-NIC. Note: if
you subscribe soon enough, I'll clue you in on what is planned
between Superman and Lois Lane.
Comically yours,
-HWM
------------------------------
Date: 19 Dec 1982 2154-PST
From: Lynn Gold
Subject: Favorite operating systems: UNIX vs TOPS-20
It's weird...whenever I ask someone who has been exposed to both
which they prefer, the answer tends to be almost exclusively
subjective. For example, I asked one of my co-workers which one he
preferred, to which he replied "Unix." I asked him what he liked
about Unix, and he said the pipelining, the way everything is a
file, and the general feel of it. I felt these were perfectly
reasonable reasons for liking it. I then asked him what he didn't
like about TOPS-20. He replied, "Well...it isn't Unix."
A similar question and answer session with someone else who
preferred TOPS-20 came out with the user liking recognition, the way
you could find your way around by just typing "?", and the general
friendliness of the operating system. When asked why he didn't like
Unix, he said "It's a flaky operating system."
I think the moral of this is that the only way you can judge either
of them is to check them both out for yourself and THEN decide.
While I admit to being more familiar with TOPS-20 than UNIX, it look
as if both have something to offer in some areas and lose in others.
--Lynn
------------------------------
Date: 20 December 1982 19:37-EST
From: Stuart M. Cracraft
Subject: Unix - Recovering Deleted Files
Tim Curry's mention of a recoverable file delete for Unix spurred my
interest. We recently installed a similar command on our system;
however, a nightly disk skulker does the actual deletion. You can
specify how long the deletes files are to be kept around before the
skulker can flush them. This scheme (from some guy at Hplabs) seems
much better than the one mentioned, in which they are only retained
until logout.
Stuart
------------------------------
Date: 20 Dec 1982 2200-PST
From: Pierre MacKay
Subject: DEL vs ^H
You ask why use the DEL (or DELETE) character for deleting an
unwanted ASCII code instead of using the ^H BACKSPACE format
effector. The answer lies in the very definitions of ANSI X3.4 and
ISO 646. BACKSPACE is a very useful character in a great many
environments. It can be used to place accents on a serial printer
(nearly all of them now respond to the code). It can be used for
pseudo-boldfacing and for underlining on even a Selectric based
serial printer, and on many others as well. Once you get stuck with
an operating system which pre-empts BACKSPACE for purposes for which
it was not intended --- I know, it was the erase character in BCD,
but BCD has been dead a long time now --- you lose a great deal of
functionality. DEL serves no function except as an erase code and
is therefore ideal for the purpose. There is no normal ASCII or ISO
character string that can include a DEL character. There are plenty
which can or should be able to include a BACKSPACE.
I seem to have spent far too much of my computing life struggling
with operating systems which pre-empted the use of ASCII control
characters for improper purposes. One of the great moments in my
text-editing experience was when the BACKSPACE SPACE BACKSPACE
response was first implemented on our operating system as a
full-duplex echo for DEL. I find the recidivism of UNIX very
unfortunate, and am glad to learn that it can be taught better
manners. Long live the DELETE code!
Pierre MacKay
------------------------------
Date: 21 December 1982 08:54-EST
From: Robert Elton Maas
Subject: soft remove under unix
Hmm, your pseudo-deleted files get actually expunged when you
logout. I certainly hope you fixed the shell so ctrl-D doesn't
cause logout like I've heard it does on Unix as supplied originally.
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 21 December 1982, 02:00-EST
From: Robert W. Kerns
Subject: Del vs ^H
Date: 1 Dec 82 23:07:13 EST (Wed)
From: Andrew Scott Beals
frankly, i don't know *why* there is all this usage of DEL as
the erase character. (yeech!) why use DEL over ^H? ^H is on the
home row (both control and H on a good keyboard, that is), so
it's MUCH easier to type. WHY?
You ever try to type ^H while typing with one hand?
On a well designed keyboard RUBOUT can be easier to type than ^H.
On our keyboards, for example, it's just to the left of A, on the
home row, and double width.
------------------------------
Date: 21 Dec 1982 1122-PST
Subject: UNIX user interface
From: Ian H. Merritt
I prefer DEL to ^H for rubouts as a general rule, but it certainly
should NOT be used as an interrupt, since it is the second most
common data hit in most modem protocols.
On other notes, my objections to the unix user environment are not
with its configurable features, but with its initial state. A virgin
unix without any user changes is virtually useless to anybody new to
unix. A user interface should not REQUIRE any changing to become
useful, but should allow changes for the purpose of enhancing an
already well designed interface.
Unix does a very nice job of allowing one to cater his environment
to exact specifications, but its initial state is so ridiculous that
it is absolutely necessary to start changing things before one can
use the system.
My other major gripe is that it is quite SLOW and seems to buckle
under heavy load conditions. As a single user (multi-process)
system, it's fine in that sense, but on a VAX780, it has trouble
supporting 10-15 moderate users without getting very slow. VMS, a
system about which I often complain for a variety of reasons, has at
least one thing going for it: it's VERY FAST.
End of flame.
<>IHM<>
------------------------------
Date: 23 Dec 1982 1047-EST
From: Tim
Subject: Re: DEL vs ^H
The main problem I have with using DEL for the backspace
character is that, on so many keyboards, DEL is located very close
to the carriage return key. This can lead to some very embarrassing
errors. I agree, though, that DEL (otherwise known as RUBOUT) is
more mnemonic. Also, since many keyboards only have one Ctrl key,
which is usually located on the left side of the keyboard, many
people might find it hard to type Ctrl-H with one hand. Imagine not
being able to drink a cup of coffee and backspace at the same time!
(I note, proudly, that my own keyboard has neither of the
above-mentioned deficits. The real reason I don't like Ctrl-H is
because it reminds me of the IBM I used to work on.)
Twinerik
------------------------------
Date: 28 November 1982 2207-EST
From: Dave Touretzky at CMU-CS-A
Subject: computer sex
The recent discussion in Human Nets of that obscene "adult" video
game for the Atari reminded me of an ad I saw recently in one of the
personal computing mags. It showed a guy with his clothes loosened,
staring incredulously at a TV set. (You only saw the back of the
set.) The advertiser was offering a way for you to play strip poker
with your computer. His program offered you two female opponents
who would be displayed on the screen in various stages of undress as
the game progressed. For the truly hard-up, one of these opponents
was guaranteed to be dumb, and therefore sure to lose each hand.
According to the ad, the images the program displayed were so
stimulating they could not be reproduced in the magazine. (where
have we heard that one before?)
When I read that ad, a chill ran down my spine. Not because of its
pedestrian brand of sexism. Women are still portrayed primarily as
sex objects by advertisers and the media but, while that's
objectionable, it's hardly shocking news. What blew me away was the
suggestion that someone should obtain sexual satisfaction by taking
off his clothes in front of his COMPUTER. Now that's kinky! Maybe
Weizenbaum was right. Is this where ELIZA leads?
@Begin(Cynicism)
Not to be outdone, I have designed my own offering in the category
of "sexual substitutes for the socially inept." Remember those
inflatable, anatomically correct dolls you see advertised in the
back of the sleazier magazines? The ones that are guaranteed
washable, with vibrating fingers $15 extra? Here's my idea: let's
modernize the sex doll business with microprocessor technology. If
vibrating fingers are worth $15, how much would your average loser
pay for a doll that moans "Ohhhh baaaaaaby!" (through a voice
synthesizer of course) at the correct moment? A few microswitches
in the right places and a microprocessor controller should do the
trick. Even better, our doll would be supplied with a limited
amount of intelligence (not too much, you don't want to threaten the
sensitive male ego) so that it could RESPOND interactively with
lines like "I love it when you touch my
like that."
Now, here's the best part: we make the doll programmable. Have it
plug into your customer's home computer (except if it's an Atari),
and he can program it to call him by name. ("Oh ,
you're such a man!") But the real reason you want it to attach to
the home computer is so that you can sell sexual fantasy cartridges
with catchy names like "The Naughty Maid" and "Bondage Slave" that
program the doll to play a particular role.
I know the computer-as-sexual-substitute theme has been around for a
while; the movie Westworld showed human beings having sex with
robots that were indistinguishable from human beings. But my
proposal is practical, requiring only a few hundred dollars of
off-the-shelf electronics and some modest programming effort.
(Slogan: "We don't just sell software, we sell sexware.") One
catch: would an electronic sex doll have to be UL listed?
@End(Cynicism)
I hope no one takes this idea seriously.
-- Dave
------------------------------
Date: 29 Nov 1982 0254-PST
From: Henry W. Miller
Subject: Video Games in Nursing homes
I'm all for it. My mother spent the majority of her last 12
years of her life in a rest home. Although it was one of the best
homes in the state, I found it very depressing. Too many of the
folks vere vegetating.
With a video game, it requires mental and physical
dexterity. Such use would tend to keep a patient at their peak.
(Of course, my Great Aunt Pearl is still going strong at 103
(104 now, maybe) by knitting mittens for the orphans in Detroit...)
When I was a teenager, I was one of those Pinball Wizards:
I could play all night on a single quarter. These new video games
have me stumped. I've never made it past the first board on PACMAN
or Donkey Kong, although I have fared well with Tempest and
Centipede. It irks me that a 10 year old can challenge me and win.
(Let me get the little so-and-so on a pinball machine, and we'll see
what happens...)
I think that using such stimuli as video games would help
keep the old folks active, which is good. (I scored 139000 on
Tempest today...)
-HWM
------------------------------
End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************
From: Pleasant@Rutgers (Pleasant@Rutgers)
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V5 #112
Newsgroups: fa.human-nets
Date: 1982-12-31 04:53:35 PST
HUMAN-NETS Digest Friday, 31 Dec 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 112
Today's Topics:
Computers and People - WorldNet (3 msgs) &
Productivity of Word-Processors,
Technology - Looming Technology (5 msgs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sunday, 28 November 1982, 19:53-EST
From: Vinayak Wallace
Subject: The changing face of Micro-computing...
From: William "Chops" Westfield
Subject: The changing face of Micro-computing...
Microcomputing is changing. Is it getting better or worse ?
Yes.
Used to be, no two systems were alike. If you wanted to sell
software, it had to be configurable for just about anything.
And the people who bought it would have to know how to configure
it.
That answer was not facetious. The future will bring both good and
bad results of this trend. What you will make of it (on the overall)
depends on your background and orientation.
We (meaning the CPM hackers who've used it for more than a year
(that's all!)), are indeed hackers -- we know the system to a
greater detail than most (> 90%) of the microcomputer users out
there. We've grown up with them, and are used to thinking of them as
toys which need great amounts of care and attention. Modifying the
source code is not a problem -- in fact, to us, it's a feature. We
get just what we want. After a while, we hardly count the minutes
it takes to compile a version with the equates set correctly.
Just doing that (running an assembler) is beyond not just the skill
but the interest of this "normal" microcomputer user. He's been sold
a tool by a salesman, and he wants to use it, not customize it. In
essence, he wants a pinto or a civic, NOT an xj7 or low-rider.
Nowadays, things are a lot different. You can pick one of
(apple, radio shack, IBM, osbourne), write software for it that
won't run on anything else, and if it's any good, you become
rich. How will this change the way people compute ?
We're different. Ok. That doesn't mean we're bad, does it? Well, to
a normal computer salesman, it does. We'd rather spend $50 on a bare
board video card than 1200 on an IBM terminal. Obviously, his profit
on us is lower. Especially when there are more terminal customers
then there are hackers.
For example, CPM remains about the only system for which lots of
USEFUL public domain software is available... People with other
systems pay for inferior products. Many people with CP/M will
pay for a product rather than use an equivalent Public domain
program... Why?
Do they really get an inferior product? I no longer think so
(although this problem worried me for a long while). I used to and
still do think that the current situation vis. a. vis. the state of
commercial software is going to bring its general quality TO US
down. However the "normal" computer user likes what he gets, because
it is (relatively) easy to use, and almost does what he wants. Just
because WE know it's easy to make it right doesn't help him. He's
still better off with an inferior product than none at all.
There is a problem with this: He gets used to an inferior product
and cannot trivially update. That problem probably won't get solved
until a 2060 costs $.59 and has a 96-pin package. C'est la vie.
Even the business CPM user doesn't want free software because, by
paying for software, he's basically buying insurance. If the
software breaks, he has a better chance of finding the author and
getting it fixed. Also, he has a better chance of getting a working
piece of code in the first place.
It IS a problem for us because, as computer scientists (or whatever)
used to state-of-the-art technology, we're continually frustrated by
the shittyness of most commercial software.
The feature of all this, on the other hand, is that pre-packaged
computers, however bad, place the concept of available computation
in the public eye. Children will grow up being comfortable with
computers, at a level not far below where most of us probably are.
They will be able to think of a computer as a flexible tool. It's
too late for the parents.
The question is, I guess: Is the current proliferation of many
basically incompatible micro-computers going to hurt or help the
WorldNet concept?
Well, I don't think anything will happen until the current batch of
12-year-olds hit around 22 or so. So another 10 years. By that time,
we'll have reasonable home computers with which to play anyway.
As for us using CPM, well, there seems to be a pretty big batch of
public domain software available to us now, even with the small
number of us there is. If we continue at this rate (which we won't
-- there'll be more, just wait) then we'll still be well off. We
have compilers and utilities and games .... and in general, better
toys than the "real world." Perhaps I sound elitist, but I think
that it's better for everyone that they lose the way they do. That
way, personal (not micro) computers don't get a bad reputation in
the "marketplace," and are still around.
.....Is it getting better or worse ?
In a sense, it's getting worse. There is less free software per
microcomputer user, and the public sense of what a microcomputer is
is, in our minds, warped. However, there IS a lot of software there.
And it's getting better in that there are more incentives for
businesses to develop new products, and by the time hardware
technology gets to the point that the "average" user will accept the
programs we want, he'll also be ready to accept the KIND of services
we want.
Be patient, Bill. We'll win in the end.
------------------------------
Date: 30 Nov 82 16:10:18-EST (Tue)
From: Gene Spafford
Subject: CrossTalk
William Westfield made a statement in Vol. 5 #108 about CrossTalk
only working on IBM Pc's -- that is an error. Les Freed, the author
of CrossTalk, is a friend of mine and I am all too aware of how many
different systems it runs on (about 30 now). One of Les' biggest
headaches is maintaining all those different versions of the same
program so that they are compatible. The user interface is
basically the same, and any two systems running CrossTalk can
communicate with each other without having to establish a new
protocol each time. It is a very nice program and runs on lots of
system with minimal setup --- that's one reason why it has become
such a big-selling piece of software. That's also why Les curses a
lot every time a new system is released. He likes the business but
isn't too fond of the adaption.
------------------------------
Date: 28 Dec 1982 0706-PST
From: Robert Maas
Subject: What services should WorldNet provide to users?
With the NCP --> TCP switchover coming soon, now seems like a good
time to ask you all what kinds of services a WorldNet should have.
The basic services that always come to mind are:
Electronic mail, including not just person-to-person messages/memos
but mailing lists and electronic magazines. This service could be
implemented via direct link (direct dial, local-area-net, or direct
satellite rebroadcast), via store and forward, or via indirect
end-to-end link such as packet switching.
File transfer, similarly.
Remote virtual terminal (TELNET), for running programs such as games
or information retrieval remotely and interactively. Except for
local service which could be done by direct dial or local-area-net
(and in some cases WATS lines), this would probably be done mostly
by indirect link (packet switching etc.).
The question I'm asking is what other types of services do we want?
They could be implemented either on top of virtual circuits (for
interactive services) or on top of electronic mail (for
non-interactive services, you send a query and a few minutes or
hours later you get a reply). Electronic mail would be preferred
because direct-dial would be cost-effective immediately whereas
virtual circuits would have to wait until the service bureau gets
installed on a large network such as TYMNET or TELENET before many
non-local users would be able to afford using it. But don't dismiss
a service because you think the communications requirements would
make it not cost effective. I'm looking for pipedreams at this time.
All our wishes for genuine user services that are implemented either
directly via the network or by cooperating programs on workstations
that can occasionally send each other messages.
Here are some ideas of my own: Consumer information exchange whereby
consumers can exchange their experiences with various products and
submit rebuttals to earlier reports; Worldwide gamemaster where
players of Chess, Go, D&D, etc. can locate opponents for games at
the same level of skill at any time of day or night and then conduct
games over the net; Catalogs of musical tunes with recognizer
software so somebody with a tune running thru hir mind can ask the
computer to "name that tune"; Inventory of second-hand merchandise,
with bidding on price, so that people who were about to throw away
something no longer wanted can sell it conveniently instead without
having to spend a day at a flea market or hold a "garage sale";
Computerized-conferencing (including debate) on any random subject,
including a "computer dating" system to set up discussion groups in
the first place; A new-idea consideration network where anyone with
an apparently good idea can pass it around for criticism (it may
have flaws, or may have been thought of before, or it may actually
be a brilliant new idea).
So anyway, let's have all your ideas, all several-hundred-odd
members, huh? Send quick stuff that comes to your mind immediately,
before the NCP --> TCP switchover. Save the rest for whenever TCP
comes up on our favorite hosts in 1983. (I.e. either get it to me
before Dec 31, or you'll have to wait a while before we're back in
communication.)
I'd like to collect the best of the ideas that are sent to me,
organize them a little, and forward the resultant listing to
HUMAN-NETS when it is back in service next year.
FROM:37'28N122'08W415-323-0720, about 3 miles from Stanford
------------------------------
Date: 21 Dec 82 13:51:12-EST (Tue)
From: David Axler
Subject: Getting Management Involved w/Word Processors
One of the more inventive notions used recently to get
management more directly involved w/word processing is the design of
terminals that don't look like terminals. A few months back, I met
someone whose brother is now working for a small Boston firm (don't
recall which, alas) that's designing a new mini-terminal, about the
size of a cigar box, with useful semi-intelligent capabilities like
remembering phone numbers of the machines you use, etc. The box
plugs directly into your mini-phone jack, so you don't need a modem.
The friend had brought one of these gadgets along to play with,
which I did. When I complained that the small size eliminated easy
typing, I was told that this was actually intentional -- it was felt
that managerial types tend to assume that anything that looks too
much like a typewriter (or at least has a key- board that looks like
a typewriter keyboard) in matters like key size and overall shape
should be given to their secretaries, and not used by important
individuals like themselves. Interesting notion....
Dave Axler (axler.upenn @ udel-relay)
------------------------------
Date: 21 December 1982 08:51-EST
From: Robert Elton Maas
Subject: Computers and Weaving (yes, really!)
Gee, how long has it been since the Jacquard Loom predated the
Hollerith punchcard? It's about time somebody uses a computer to
emulate the result of the loom in order to debug loom programs!
Congratulations to whoever finally did it!
Next step, write a program to go the other way, given desired
pattern, compute whether it's possible to loom it and if so the best
way to do it (the one with the fewest complexities together with
strongest most interlocking structure).
------------------------------
Date: 21 Dec 1982 1048-MST
From: Walt
Subject: Re: Computers and Weaving (yes, really!)
La plus ca change, la plus c'est le meme chose. The Jacquard loom
was supposedly one of the things that inspired Babbage's work.
------------------------------
Date: 21 Dec 1982 1116-PST
From: Pierre MacKay
Subject: automated weaving patterns
I suspect that the old punched card of the Jacquard system is still
the commonest way of transferring a pattern to the actual fabric.
(This is usually given as the lineal ancestor of the Hollerith
punched card.) The last few places I have happened to
visit--entirely by accident, it is not my thing at all-- had the
same old clatter of punched cards running in 1982 as might have been
seen in 1882. Since you can't drive a spun fiber faster than a
certain maximum, there may be no very good reason to change from
punched cards (metal cards in this case) to newer technology. I
admit that a floppy disk would be quieter, however. The cards make
an awful racket.
Pierre MacKay
------------------------------
Date: 22 Dec 82 3:19:40-EST (Wed)
From: Ron Natalie
Subject: Loomings...
History fans will also note that the Punched Cards used to control
the Jacquard loom predate Hollerith by a bit.
-Ron
------------------------------
Date: 25 Dec 1982 1936-PST
From: GRANGER.RS at UCI-20A
Subject: Weaving
I'll bet some of you don't know the derivation of the word "system:"
it comes from the greek "syn-" (together with) and "histemai" (to
weave!). From this bit of etymology I conclude that weavers were
the first true systems people -- our primordial ancestors.
------------------------------
End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************