From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) 
Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #1
Newsgroups: fa.human-nets
Date:   1985-01-09 23:44:57 PST

From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) 

HUMAN-NETS Digest       Wednesday, 9 Jan 1985       Volume 8 : Issue 1

Today's Topics:
         Computers and People - Paper vs CD Books (3 msgs) &
                     The AI Community (2 msgs) &
                           Friend Finders,
               Computers and the Law - Copy Protection
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 2 January 1985 04:11-EST
From: Jerry E. Pournelle 
Subject: Paper vs CD Books
To: abc @ BRL-TGR

Your notion of specialized "encyclopedias" is excellent; once
most knowledge is available electronically -- because stored on
CD disks -- then compilations of various pages from different
volumes onto WRITE ONCE DISKS becomes possible.  As one of my
upcoming columns discusses, the write-once 100 megabyte optical
disk lets you accumulate a LOT of information from various
sources, store it, and yet not have your house overflow with
paper.

------------------------------

From: ihnp4!houxm!pegasus!lzmi!psc@Berkeley
Date: 2 Jan 85 03:39:03 CST (Wed)
To: pegasus!houxm!ihnp4!ucbvax!human-nets@Berkeley
Subject: Re: HUMAN-NETS Digest   V7 #85

There's at least one kind of publishing that could really take
advantage of CD books.  That's the people who print *large* notebooks
of information that have to be updated fairly frequently (more than
twelve times a year).  For an example, visit the office of any
programmer who uses an IBM or DEC operating system.

Rather than Xyzzy Inc. sending you a packet of sheets to add to your
looseleaf notebooks, they'd send you a new disk.  Two advantages:
you'd find it much easier to update your documentation set, which
would thus tend to be more up-to-date.  Also, if the disks weren't
easy to reproduce locally, Xyzzy Inc. wouldn't have to worry about
sites running down to the local Xerox machine and running off "pirated
documentation".  The expensive, low circulation reports might like
this especially, and they're generally kept on reference shelves.
(Haven't seen any Datapro Reports down at Sandy Hook lately.-)

This works much better if the disks are bulk erasable.  The first doc
set might cost $1000 (say); the second would cost $1000, but with a
$950 rebate for return of the original disk, which could be easily
recycled.  Xyzzy would just erase it and use it for the next release.

Good for phone books, too, when everyone who needs your particular
phone book has a CD reader.

(BTW, is the phrase "CD disk" redundant?  "Compact disk disk?")
   -Paul S. R. Chisholm
   ...!hogpd!pegasus!lzmi!psc         The above opinions are my own,
   ...!cbosg!lzmi!psc                 and do not necessarily represent
   ...!ucbvax!ihnp4!lznv!psc          those of anyone else.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 4 Jan 85 12:19:54 pst
From: ihnp4!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!eder@Berkeley (Dani Eder)
To: uw-beaver!cornell!vax135!houxm!ihnp4!ucbvax!human-nets@Berkeley
Subject: Re: HUMAN-NETS Digest   V7 #86

[4 January 1985]

     I can think of at least two other uses for Compact Disks (CD's).
One is to improve on the scientific calculator.  I would pay large
sums of money for a box that had the CRC Handbook of Chemistry and
Physics, plus several other reference books available read only from a
CD.  The data could be extracted and manipulated with calcuator-type
functions.  A packet of CD's could replace several bookcases of
reference books.  If the setup was reasonably portable (i.e. fit in my
briefcase), that would be acceptable.

     Another use for the capacity of CD's would be for lawyers.  Today
the US laws plus accumulated decisions fill about 440 volumes.
Lawyers would find it very valuble to do keyword searches on this
database, to find relevant decisions for their clients.  This is
possible today on a dialup information service, but the costs are
fairly high on an hourly basis.  An additional advantage for lawyer
types is the distribution cost of the medium.  Most legal series are
updated annually, at considerable cost ( hundreds/year).  CD's could
reduce this.

Dani Eder / Boeing Aerospace Company / ssc-vax!eder

------------------------------

Date: Monday, 31 Dec 1984 10:18-EST
From: munck@Mitre-Bedford
To: Human-Nets@Rutgers
Subject: Overblown Expectations for AI

   Les Earnest's report that sanity still exists in the "real" AI
community, despite the fantastic pronouncements surrounding it, was
long overdue.  However, I must quibble with his use of past tense in
describing the attempts at AI "Command and Control" systems by the Air
Force and others.  They've changed focus slightly, but they're still
around.

   Specifically, it's a widely-held belief in the DoD that our
problems with building large software systems will be solved - more
accurately, circumvented - within a decade by AI.  They believe that
AI systems will be able to listen to an hour or so of verbal
description of, say, an air-defense system and then produce overnight
the million-odd lines of code to implement it. Normally, I'd classify
this belief as relatively harmless, like those in the Tooth Fairy, the
Star Wars initiative, and Santa Claus, but it has a chilling effect on
work on practical, people-writing-code methodologies.  I have no doubt
that there is a great deal of the programming task that can be taken
over by computers using AI techniques, but the state of the art is
that many people are not convinced that compilers can be used to free
humans from doing register allocation.

   Fusion research uses the criterion of "break-even," the point at
which a reactor produces more power than is needed to run it, as a
goal. I suggest that a similar measure could be applied to AI systems
and the field as a whole. What AI systems have saved more human effort
than was needed to produce them?

           -- Bob Munck

------------------------------

From: ihnp4!utzoo!henry@Berkeley
Date: 2 Jan 85 23:07:58 CST (Wed)
To: MDC.WAYNE%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: AI, laser disks, etc.

Ah, I wondered what sort of response I would get from the AI folks to
that flame.

I agree that outliners, natural-language interfaces, and free-form
databases are interesting things, and not necessarily fads.  But the
commercial versions of same that I have seen -- and I admit I have not
made an exhaustive survey -- have struck me as 5% content and 95%
marketing hype.  That is, lots of sales literature wrapped around a
not-very-complex program.  Something better is needed before these
things will truly become worth their keep.

I admit I'm looking at them from a Unix environment, so my standards
as to what's trivial and what isn't are fairly high.  I have no major
experience with current micro environments, and what experience I have
had convinces me that I don't want to plunge in just yet.

>     (2) Mitch Kapor's remarks about AI are not, as you put it, a lot
> of "marketing hype." As I understand it, a company has been spun off
> from Lotus which is doing serious research in natural language
> processing.  That company will probably develop a product somewhat
> like Intellect or Clout which will become an essential element in
> future integrated software from Lotus.

If he doesn't want them to sound like marketing hype, he needs to find
some new buzzwords to use.  I would not be at all surprised to find
that there was something solid behind the verbiage in this case, but I
sure couldn't tell that from the original text.  Remember, this is the
latest New Hot Area, and everybody is making glowing claims.

>    (3) A pencil and paper is fine, but I much prefer a Model 100 as
> a portable device for recording and shaping notes and ideas.  A
> Model 100 with significantly greater memory, built-in idea
> processing software, and a connecter to an optical disk storage
> device would, I suspect, wean many people away from paper and
> pencils for good.

I confess I'd be very interested in such a thing myself... but I don't
see one being marketed.  The existing Model 100 does not seem to me to
be a great leap forward over pencil and paper, unless it is mandatory
that the output of the operation be machine-readable.  Yes, I have
used one.  Don't forget that a graphics display, with a decent
resolution and *software* *to* *use* *it*, should be on your wishlist.
Graphics is a non-trivial part of a lot of my use of pencil and paper,
even when all I am manipulating is text.

I note with considerable displeasure that the Data General 1 does not
have square pixels, due to Data General's fixation on 24x80.

>    (4) Building a powerful idea processor is very much a function of
> available memory.  Framework, for instance, would be a much more
> effective product if the quality of its word processor and database
> management system could be raised to the level of ZyWrite II Plus
> and MDBS III.  To acquire that kind of power would require an extra
> megabyte or two of memory.

Exercising heroic willpower, I will refrain from describing in detail
the things I have seen done on an 8K PDP8.  Substituting memory for
thought is often a worthwhile tradeoff, but there is a mythology
growing up that you can't do anything useful in less than (your
favorite number here) megabytes.  Nonsense.  Guano.  Utterly false.  I
would conjecture that sufficient application of (human) intelligence
would easily fit the capabilities you want into the existing memory.
Good software does not have to be elephantine.  Corollary: the number
of people writing good software is small, and dropping fast.

Remember the comment I made in my original letter: the number of good
programs for the 64K Apple II is less than the number for the (say)
512K IBM PC... but it's not a factor of 8 less.

Of course more memory is useful.  Beating a problem to death with
multiple megabytes is often the most cost-effective way to do it.  But
being deprived of this possibility should not leave you gasping like a
fish out of water, totally unable to proceed.  There will, of course,
be some size of memory where the damn thing just won't fit.  It's
smaller than you think, though.

I repeat my original comment: if good and glorious things really are
possible in umpteen megabytes, a convincing demonstration of this
ought to be possible with current machines.  Not a production version,
mind you, but a convincing experimental prototype.

>      (5) The privacy issue in regard to optical disks is a red
> herring.  The federal government already has easy access to much of
> the sensitive information which would be stored on a personal disk.
> A biodisk might give individuals an opportunity to know as much
> about themselves as the government does.

I already know rather more about myself than the feds do; don't you?
I'd prefer to keep it that way, too.

Beyond a certain point, a quantitative change becomes qualitative.
Making information more accessible does not change the theoretical
level of privacy, but it makes formerly-impractical invasions of
privacy possible and simple.  Did Mr. X really write that vicious
anonymous letter to the campus paper, claiming that the leftists were
rapidly becoming indistinguishable from the Nazis?  Look at his
biodisk, and find out.

                            Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
                            {allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!henry

------------------------------

Date: Mon 7 Jan 85 03:46:00-EST
From: Wayne McGuire 
Subject: Friend Finders
To: zbbs%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA

     From The New York Times, 1/4/85, p. B6:

COMPUTER SEEKS LOST FRIENDS

     A grandmother in Arkansas is looking for the niece she has not
seen in years to tell her she is an heir.  A 21-year-old woman in New
York wants to find the pen pal she shared secrets with when they were
12.  And two men who traveled to the Vietnam Memorial in Washington
did not find the name of their commanding officer in Vietnam, who they
thought was dead.  Now they are looking for him.

     They turned to Friend Finders, an organization begun in November
as "a lost and found for friends."  Friend Finders has set up a
computer to try to match the searchers with the missing.

     Herbert Farmer, a real estate investor in Anchorage, had the idea
for the organization when he became frustrated trying to find friends
he made as a prisoner in World War II.  So he turned to his friend
Larry Pedersen, a family budget consultant in Anchorage.  Mr.
Pedersen, now the president of Friend Finders, said: "Herb called me
last February and said he had an idea I might be interested in.  I
haven't been able to put this idea down since."

     So far, Mr. Farmer has spent $300,000 to purchase a computer with
a capacity of 200 million names and to rent an office in Poulsbo,
Wash., from which Mr. Pedersen is operating.

     "You figure you've got friends you'll never lose track of," Mr.
Pedersen said.  "But as the years go by, there are fewer Christmas
cards.  We found everybody we talked to could think of a friend
they've lost an address to."

     Those who search for someone through Friend Finders are asked to
give the name of the missing friend, nicknames, date of birth, places
he or she lived and, if married, the spouse's name.  The information
is stored in the computer.

     Anyone who simply wants to register with Friend Finders can do so
at no charge.  If a caller wishes to search for someone, the fee is $5
a year; people who have initiated a search will be asked each year if
they want the search to continue, and will be charged the annual fee
once more, Mr. Pedersen said.  An additional $5 will be charged if the
person is found.  The organization is still waiting for the computer
to match a searcher with a friend.

     "First we verify it's a friendly caller," Mr. Pedersen said.  "We
don't want any bill collectors."  He said the caller's word is taken
on this point.

     "Then," he added, "through the process of elimination the
computer zeroes it down to the right person.  If it doesn't find a
match, we'll keep trying.  We're betting on a match any day now."

     If a match is made, both the searcher and the person he or she is
seeking will be notified.  The searcher will be given the telephone
number only if the other party approves, Mr. Pedersen said.

     All calls are kept confidential, he said.  "It's like an unlisted
phone number that's only open to your friends," he added.  He declined
to say how many names had been entered in the computer so far.

     Anita Pacquette of Poulsbo, who works in the office answering the
phone, said: "When people call, they're always astonished it doesn't
cost more.  They say, "I've been looking for this person for years,
and I finally found a way to find them."

     Friend Finders can be reached at 1-800-346-3377 from 10 A.M. to
10 P.M. Eastern time.  In Washington the number is 800-422-2514.  A
brochure may be obtained by writing Friend Finders, 314 Lloyd
Building, Seattle, Wash. 98101.

------------------------------

Date: 31 Dec 84 09:33:19 PST (Mon)
To: PALLAS%su-score.arpa@UCI-ICSB
Cc: POURNE@mit-mc
Subject: MusicWorks queries:  Backup?  FORTH??
From: "Tim Shimeall" 

Please correct me if I am mistaken, but aren't you really saying:
"How can I tell the vendor of a software product that the utility
of that product would be greatly enhanced by the ability to make
a backup copy?"

If this is what you're asking then why not simply tell the vendor so?
Write the vendor a letter (I presume you know which company did the
original marketing, and at least the city in which its located).  Now,
from the vendor's point of view, providing you with the capability
of making arbitrary backup copies of the software may be unwise.  The
question from his or her viewpoint may be: "Will I lose more customers
due to the lack of backups, or due to copying by software pirates?"
This is a side issue.  You have at least communicated your need for
backups to the vendor, and may recieve some constructive result from
it.
                        Tim

------------------------------

End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************


From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #2 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-01-20 09:47:01 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Sunday, 20 Jan 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 2 Today's Topics: Query - Use of Computer Networks for Impaired People, Responses to Queries Floppy Disk Storage (3 msgs) & A Rural Net of Micros, Computers and People - AI People & CDs vs. Books (2 msgs) Information: Online Technical Reports ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 11 Jan 85 11:00 IST From: Henry Nussbacher To: I would like to know if any articles or digests appear about the following topics: 1) Use of the network for mute and hearing impaired people. 2) Use of the network for paralyzed and stroke victims (severely immobolized). The reason I am asking is because a person here in Israel has a group of people that she is "head" of. They are (I think) called "Society of Hearing Impaired People In Israel" and she knows a little about networks and she felt that it would be great for these people to communicate with friends and people in a similar situation throughout the world. Stroke victims and immobolized people feel limited in their activities and their scope of outside contact. Being able to sit at a terminal and have electronic conversations with people who are also immobolized might be extremely theraputic. I am wondering if any medical journal or researcher has explored this side of "human-nets". Hank Weizmann Institute of Science Rechovot, Israel ------------------------------ From: Norm Shapiro Date: 15 Jan 85 09:41:45 PST (Tue) To: INFO-MICRO@brl-vgr Subject: Floppy Disk Storage: Steel or Plastic Almost all of the floppy disk storage gadgets I have seen sold are made out of plastic. It struck me that it would be better to store floppy disks in steel, or some other iron alloy, so that when they are kept near computers, terminals, modems etc they will not be subject to damaging stray magnetic impulses. I finally somebody, (Mead-Hatcher, Buffalo N.Y), who makes steel floppy disk housings. But a collegue remarked that steel, which although it will shield the disks from magnetic radiation, can itself become magnitized and thereby damage the disks it stores. What's the best way to store floppy disks: in steel or plastic? In my case, the disks are 5.25 inch, double sided, quad-denisty. Norman $Shapiro norm@rand-unix ...!decvax!randvax!norm 213 393 0411 The Rand Corporation 1700 Main Street Santa Monica CA 90406 ------------------------------ Date: 15 Jan 1985 16:22:00-EST From: mlsmith@NADC To: INFO-MICRO@BRL-VGR.ARPA, norm@rand-unix Subject: Floppy Disk Storage: Steel or Plastic Cc: kushnier@NADC We have some very attractive _wood_ floppy boxes that are much stronger than plastic, and since they look good are located on the end of the table. mlsmith@nadc.ARPA ------------------------------ From: kyle.wbst@XEROX.ARPA Date: 16 Jan 85 12:25:14 EST Subject: Re: Floppy Disk Storage: Steel or Plastic To: Norm Shapiro Cc: INFO-MICRO@BRL-VGR.ARPA I agree with the comment that steel could become magnetized and thus cause more harm in the long run. Your question raises another issue, though. Plastic can accumulate a static electric charge. I have seen some ads recently (selling anti static devices for computer rooms) that suggest that static discharges can cause damage to floppy disks. My first reaction to such ads was Hog Wash... more ad hype. But then I thought, if the discharge was strong enough it might create a localized electromagnetic field of sufficient strength to cause an error on very high density floppy disks. Does any one know if this could be a real problem? Earle. ------------------------------ Date: 11 January 1985 04:58-EST From: Jerry E. Pournelle Subject: query re rural net of micros To: dual!islenet!bob @ UCB-VAX It isn't just rural nets that have those characteristics. Think about the computer phenomenon in the US, and what's happening this year... ------------------------------ Date: 11 Jan 1985 20:33 EST (Fri) From: Wayne McGuire To: ihnp4!utzoo!henry@UCB-VAX.ARPA Subject: AI, laser disks, etc. CLAIMS ABOUT AI Spencer: "Ah, I wondered what sort of response I would get from the AI folks to that flame." Let me hasten to point out that (1) I am not an expert on AI, but only someone with a strong interest in it, (2) the AI community is extremely diverse, and comprises many different, often contradictory viewpoints, and (3) I didn't imagine the idea processing software I described for optical disk-based personal assistants to be a product of especially advanced AI research. I do think your brand of skepticism is valuable: it will help keep the field of AI honest. MEMORY & INTELLIGENCE Spencer: "Exercising heroic willpower, I will refrain from describing in detail the things I have seen done on an 8K PDP8. Substituting memory for thought is often a worthwhile tradeoff, but there is a mythology growing up that you can't do anything useful in less than (your favorite number here) megabytes. Nonsense. Guano. Utterly false." Much memory alone does not for intelligence make, but it is a necessary (if not sufficient) ingredient of intelligence, as oxygen is for living mammals. Intelligence is probably to an important extent a function of the number of conceptual connections that exist among the number of conceptual objects in an organism or machine (conceptual connections are themselves, of course, conceptual objects): "... Experts differ from novices in science, chess, and other fields that have been studied not only in having more information in permanent memory but also, and more significantly, in being able to process it efficiently. Among experts, for example, items of information are more thoroughly indexed and thus can be rapidly brought to conscious memory. The items, moreover, are elaborately associated or linked with one another. Two consequences of these associations--the ability to recover information by alternative links, even when parts of the direct indexing are lost, and the capacity for extensive means-ends, or trial-and-error, searches--are the essential processes called into play in all problem-solving, from the most elementary scientific discovery to the most advanced.... "The greatest advantage of the expert--and, conversely, the biggest problem for the novice--attempting to gain literacy in cognitively demanding fields is 'chunking,' the representation of abstract groups of items as linked clusters that can be efficiently processed. Such chunks may underlie mental processes ranging from the childhood stages of cognitive development identified by Jean Piaget, to the themata found by Gerald Holton in the history of scientific discovery. Simon estimates that 50,000 chunks, about the same magnitude as the recognition vocabulary of college-educated readers, may be required for the expert mastery of a special field. The highest achievements in various disciplines, however, may require a memory store of one million chunks, which may take even the talented about seventy hours of concentrated effort per week for a decade to acquire...." Herbert J. Walberg. Scientific literacy and economic productivity in international perspective. Daedalus 112 (2), Spring 1983, pp. 1-28. All this indexing, linking, associating, and chunking that Walberg refers to is very memory intensive, both in human beings and machines. In the future really interesting AI programs, especially in the domain of natural language, will probably require many terabytes of memory or more stored in densely connected parallel processing networks. An 8K PDP8 won't quite suffice. SELF-KNOWLEDGE "I already know rather more about myself than the feds do; don't you?" In principle it might be possible for a large organization (like the government) or any outside agent to know much more about you than you know about yourself. Just because you inhabit your body doesn't mean that you possess the information, or intelligence, or analytical skills to understand in great depth your own personality, behavior patterns, and social situation. Imagine an organization with software that integrates the best analytic knowledge and methods from economics, sociology, psychology, literary analysis, history, anthropology and other disciplines, and with the power to apply that software in an automatic multidimensional analysis of the full set of information about any person (all the kinds of things I suggested systematically archiving on optical disks). In this set of personal data we could also include all the relevant contextual information surrounding someone (especially behavior by other agents) which that person might not be aware of or have access to. I think you see my point. I don't know that such organizations or software exist, but they could in theory. (On a much less ambitious scale, programs probably already exist for understanding social networks, and the positions of individuals within them, on the basis of analyzing communications traffic.) Personal biodisks would at least give one in machine readable form some of the raw material with which to analyze one's own life with intelligent programs. -- Wayne McGuire ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Jan 85 11:33:28 pst From: hpda!hptabu!dclaar@Berkeley (Doug Claar) Subject: CDs obsoleting books Re: CDs obsoleting books The biggest factor I see holding back this "revolution" (didn't they say TV would replace books, too?) is the display medium. I'm surprised that no one else has mentioned it. The example that everyone uses is the Encyclopedia Brittanica, but what most people are refering to is its WORDS. Removing the pictures removes much of the usefulness. Another example: I looked at one of my old text books, and every page had either different fonts, or diagrams, or a picture, or colored letters. All of these things made the text easier to understand. The current displays, besides being hard to read, lack the color and graphics capabilities to present this information, let alone the equivalent of "4 color" pictures. Finally, there is the matter of capacity. Most books present far more characters per page than a terminal (and you can see 2 pages at once). Here are some examples: what width x length #characters visible factor ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Terminal 80x24 1920 1920 1 Fiction (Sherlock Holmes) 55x36 1980 3960 2 Engineering text 85x46 3910 7820 4 Macro Economics text 78x60 4680 9360 4.9 Byte magazine 105x59 6195 12390 6.4 This becomes even more obvious is you include pictures. A "picture may be worth 1000 words", but it costs many more (computer) words. Clearly, the "human interface" has a ways to go before books die. Doug Claar HP Computer Systems Division UUCP: { ihnp4 | mcvax!decvax }!hplabs!hpda!dclaar -or- ucbvax!hpda!claar ARPA: hpda!dclaar@ucb-vax.ARPA ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Jan 85 12:35:46 pst From: amdcad!phil@Berkeley (Phil Ngai) Subject: use for CDs When will AAA come out with a CD having all their maps on it? And when will GM have a reader available in their cars? I can't wait... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jan 85 20:27:50 est From: krovetz@nlm-mcs (Bob Krovetz) Subject: online technical reports The following is a list of people who can be contacted at various sites on the net for ordering technical reports. I've tried to determine who is the site contact, whether they have an on line bibliography, if they have a mailing list for notification of new TR's, and if the TR's themselves are available on line. If anyone knows of this information for any sites I haven't mentioned, please send me a message and I will post a followup to the net. Note that the mailing lists mentioned are U.S. mail, not electronic! Online bibliographies at the various sites may be FTP'd by logging in with id: ANONYMOUS and password GUEST (this only applies if you are on the ARPANET) Yale: Donna Mauri (MAURI@YALE) is the contact person for AI or cognitive science reports. There is no online list of those reports, but she can send a hard copy list. For non-AI/cognitive science reports the contact person is Kim Washington (WASHINGTON@YALE). CMU: No online list, however they do have a mailing list for notification of recent TR's. TR's can be ordered over the net. The contact person is Sylvia Hoy (HOY@CMU-CS-A). MIT: There is an online list, but the publications office is undergoing a restructuring, so it isn't available at the moment. A contact for ordering the TR's will be established at some future time. SRI: No online line of just the report names, but there is a list of the reports plus abstracts. Tonita Walker (TWalker@SRI-AI) is the contact person. Many of the reports are available for FTPing. UTEXAS: A list of current reports is in {UTEXAS}TRLIST. A master list of reports still in print is under MASTER.TR. Many of the current reports themselves are also available in the above directory, but they contain text formatting commands. The directory contains a file READ.ME which tells which text formatter was used for which reports (SCRIBE vs. NROFF). Reports may be ordered by sending mail to CS.TECH@UTEXAS-20. BBN: No reports or list online (no list even in hard copy). Contact author directly about getting a copy of the TR. PARC: Maia Pindar (PINDAR@XEROX) is the contact person. An online copy of the bibliography is not available at the moment, but Ms. Pindar may be contacted to obtain a hardcopy. Rutgers: Contact Christine Loungo (LOUNGO@RUTGERS) or Carol Petty (PETTY@RUTGERS) to obtain reports. They maintain a mailing list to distribute notices of the TR's and the abstracts. The abstracts of recent reports are online and under: {RUTGERS}tecrpts-online.doc. ISI: Lisa Trentham is the contact (LTRENTHAM@ISIB). There is a list of the available reports under {ISIB}ISI-PUBLICATIONS.DOC Stanford: Stanford reports are issued by four sources: the HPP (Heuristic Programming Project), the AI lab, the Center for the Study of Language and Information (CSLI), and the Computer Science Department. HPP reports are available without charge by contacting Paula Edmisten (EDMISTEN@SUMEX). Please be reasonable with your requests; no more than 15 at a time! There is no online bibliography available, but a hard copy may be requested. There is an online bibliograpy of AI lab reports in AIMLST in [BIB,DOC]@SU-AI. Some of the reports are available online and are so indicated in the bibliography. Reports from CSLI may be requested from Dikran Karagueuzian (DIKRAN@SU-CSLI). A bibliography of the reports is stored under {SU-CSLI}CATALOG.REPORTS. CSLI will also be issuing lecture notes, and a bibliography of these will be under {SU-CSLI}CATALOG.LECTURE-NOTES. The reports are available without charge, but there is a charge for the lecture notes. There is also a charge for reports published by either the AI lab or the Computer Science Department, but information as to cost and/or availablity may be sent to Kathy Berg (BERG@SU-SCORE). A bibliography of CSD reports from 1963 to 1984 is available for $5.00. The department maintains a mailing list for notification of new TR's. You can be added to it by contacting Kathy Berg. Updates are sent out about five or six times per year. ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #4 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-02-08 18:48:09 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Friday, 8 Feb 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 4 Today's Topics: Queries - European Net Digests & Soliciting personal stories on using networks & Network Address?, Response to Query - Magnetic media storage Computers and People - Computer Aided Local Politics (2 msgs) Information - Online technical Reports & MIT Communications Forum update ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 29 Jan 1985 18:05 EST From: David Millman Reply-to: CC.DSM @ Columbia-20.ARPA Subject: European Net Digests Does anyone know if other than U.S. based networks have analogous distributed digests (like this one)? Specifically, I'm wondering if non-English-speaking European countries have "communities" like the arpa mailing lists and uucp's netnews. I suppose organizations like the PTT might have more restrictions on data transmitted than arpa does. How would I get in touch with any node from arpa or uucp? Forget the Japanese; some kind of mappable character set is preferred. -- David Millman Columbia U. Computer Center ------------------------------ From: Eugene Miya Date: 31 Jan 1985 1124-PST (Thursday) Subject: Soliciting short interesting personal stories on using Subject: networks Two weeks, I was invited to be a delegate on a technology exchange to mainland China. The subject of this exchange is office automation technology [not my immediate field of research, but a side interest]. I feel like the character Roy Neary in Close Encounters of the Third Kind being 'picked.' I now have three months to prepare for this exchange and this is where I wish to involve human-nets. It turns out that the person leading the delegation has not had many positive experiences using electronic communication: mail, networks, bulletin boards [he does not have ARPAnet or Usenet access]. I was fortunate, several times, to be exposed to the early ARPAnet, early DECnet, and Xerox Altos on Ethernet. An idea occurred to me based upon John Quarterman's paper on Notable Computer Networks. In that paper, John solicited mail on networks which composed his paper. I would like to do something similar for our Chinese friends. I would like to collect any good short (1-2 paragraph) stories you might have on positive (or negative, I guess) experiences on computer networks and bulletin boards. Things like 'Yes, electronic mail frees me from the phone.' are not enough. If you 'met your spouse' via the network, (a little unusual) these are the kinds of things I would like to include. I would prefer not to edit letters (including mail headers). I might select as many as five or six letter for inclusion into my presentation. I realize there are thousands who read this board, and I can't take all, but credit will obviously be given when used. Remember, this is an office automation exchange, not a computer networking discussion, my audience will include chemists, sociologists, and lots of non computer people. I also plan to personally contact certain notable network individuals for some of their ideas and experiences to take to China. Also, if you have any special advise about going to China, I would not mind hearing this. I have been told carry a strong cough syrup, a bit of TP, a set of photos of where I am from (work and home) is a nice gesture. Now, a filter. Do not mail to my normal return address. I don't wish to swamp those machines. Please send your commentary to: eugene@riacs.ARPA Thank you. --eugene miya NASA Ames Research Center ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Feb 85 11:33 CST From: Boebert@HI-MULTICS.ARPA Subject: A.K. Dewdney on the net? Does anyone know if there is a net address for Alexander K. Dewdney, author of "Planiverse?" He is a CS Professor at the U of Western Ontario. -- Earl (Boebert -at HI-Multics) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 05 Feb 85 14:32:11 EST From: carpenter@NBS-VMS Subject: Magnetic media storage To: norm@rand-unix In response to the questions about storage of floppy disks, I recommend that you get a copy of the following NBS publication. Care and Handling of Computer Magnetic Storage Media by Sidney B. Geller NBS Special Publication 500-101 This is available from the Govt Printing Office, and I suspect that a phone call to Sid at 301-921-3723 might work wonders. The basic answer is that magnets of any reasonable strength have to be VERY close to the disk to do any harm. I hope this is some help. Bob Carpenter ------------------------------ Date: Tue 29 Jan 85 12:38:39-PST From: Ted Shapin Subject: Computer Aided Local Politics To: Hoffman.es@XEROX.ARPA The Whole Earth Review for Mar 85, page 89 has an interesting account of the SYSOP of a Colorado Springs BBS who used that medium to organize community action on a proposed ordinance regulating working out of the home. After it was widely discussed and revised using his BB, it was adopted by the city. ------------------------------ Date: 1 Feb 85 10:50:36 PST (Friday) From: Hoffman.es@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Computer Aided Local Politics [LONG MESSAGE] To: DBOOTH@USC-ISIF.ARPA, BEC.SHAPIN@USC-ECL.ARPA From 'Whole Earth Review', March 1985, page 89: [Copyright (c)1985 by POINT, a California nonprofit corporation All rights reserved. Reprinted WITH permission. Subscriptions: $18/year (6 issues) Whole Earth Review, P.O. Box 27956, San Diego, CA 92128] THE NEIGHBORHOOD ROM: COMPUTER-AIDED LOCAL POLITICS By Dave Hughes [You can contact visionary Dave Hughes, a retired West Point teacher, using his pioneer computer network bulletin board (303/623-2391), if you can log on -- it's busy 20 hours a day. I used a plain-vanilla telephone interview: Hughes speaking all the way. -- Kevin Kelly] About two years ago the city planners of Colorado Springs decided that they were going to tighten the city ordinance that regulates working out of your home. I saw in the newspaper a small legal announcement that this was coming up before the planning commission , so I went down on behalf of the whole community of 12,000 people and 200 small businesses living around old Colorado City. It was clear that if the city enforced the ordinance rigorously it would make home-based entrepreneurial activities suffer. I was the only person in that city of 300,000 who actually stood up and testified against that ordinance. They could have just ignored me and rolled over me with a tank. But I did not argue backyard repair of cars; I argued high tech. As a consequence the planning commission tabled the matter for 30 days. I brought the text of the three-page ordinance with me and typed it into my computer bulletin board. I drew attention to it with a notice on the menu. I had already built up a little reputation among those who dial my bulletin board as a serious place for discussing public and political problems, so I put it up on the board saying I didn't like the actual text of the law. I began to collect on the bulleting board other implications of the law that I had never thought of. For instance, though I don't have anything to do with direct sales, somebody pointed out that the text would have prohibited Amway products, Shaklee products, and all those kinds of businesses, which are a very great growth part of our economy. Well, if you have the time and bucks, you can buy an ad and form a big organization, hold a press conference and mobilize public opinion. What I did was, I sent a letter to the editor of the two local newspapers and simply said that I didn't like the ordinance and anybody that has a computer or terminal can dial 623-2391 and read the ordinance for himself. I got a response of over 250 callers into the board in the next 10 days, over and above the normal number of callers. What I didn't anticipate was that some of the callers were high-tech people who worked in larger plants -- specifically Digital, Rolm Corporation, and Walter Drake (a mail order house here). They not only read the ordinance individually but flipped it on the printer, printed it, xeroxed it, circulated it through the plant and the next thing I knew thousands of copies of this ordinance were being circulated throughout the city although I never went to any meetings and never xeroxed nothin'. Some of them went to the press and to the council and started taking their own individual action and I never had to. The next thing I knew, the TV and everybody else got in on it. They also began to put the heat on the city planners. In the end the city council never knew what hit them. At the next meeting 175 people showed up. I didn't represent anybody but myself. People came in and wondered angrily why the mayor was letting the planning commission prevent people from making income from out of their homes. There was at least one person who captured the text on his computer, rewrote the thing and uploaded it again -- revised it. Well, that's a piece of cake with a word processor program. Normally nobody puts out that kind of energy no matter how concerned bcause the effort to get involved with local politics, the effort to do your civic duty, the effort to mobilize public opinion takes a great deal of energy. But suddenly the economy of effort that computers gives makes it possible for people to electronically mobilize opinion. We eventually only came together in time and space at the actual hearing. We sent the ordinance back to the planners four times and each time I put it back on the board until it was totally resolved. It actually became an issue during the city campaigns for mayor, but by the time of the elections it was an acceptable ordinance -- the steam had run out of it. Finally, on its own momentum it came in front [of] the city council for approval and not one person stood up on behalf of or against it and the mayor shot off his mouth and wondered where all those people were that were angry. So I wrote an open letter to the editors of the newspapers. I said, "Well, look Mr. Mayor, it's now an acceptable ordinance. But the more important point is that the public hearing was held in the ROM of a neighborhood computer and where the heck were you?" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Feb 85 13:32:05 PST From: Brenda Ramsey To: krovetz@nlm-mcs Subject: Online technical Reports The UCLA Computer Science Department currently does not have an accessible on-line list of technical reports or the reports themselves. However, you may contact - Brenda Ramsey . We request that all our reports be prepaid - prices may be obtained by writing or calling direct - (213) 825-2778. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Feb 85 16:13 EST From: Kahin@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA Subject: MIT Communications Forum Update on February 21 MIT Communications Forum Seminar, "Software Protection and Marketing": Jim Button, author of PC-File and PC-Calc and founder of Buttonware, Inc., will be speaking at this seminar. A systems engineer for IBM for 17 years, he is now one of the leading proponents and marketers of user-supported software ("shareware") (The other speakers are Todd Sun of Multimate International and Marvin Goldschmidt of Lotus Development Corporation. The seminar will be held at 4:00 in room 37-252.) ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #5 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-02-08 20:41:42 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Friday, 8 Feb 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 5 Today's Topics: Administrivia - Topology of BITNET/ available, Queries - Non-computer users use of electronic mail & Computer Ethics Research & Computer Environments Make a Difference?, Computer Networks - A Telesophy Project & Hello Stargate, Goodbye Mailing List Freedom? & Computers and People - CDs displacing books & More on Idea Processors, Computers on TV - Donahue on Computer Subculture (2 msgs) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri 1 Feb 85 15:08:54-CST From: Werner Uhrig Subject: FYI: Topology of BITNET/EARN/NETNORTH follows BITNET/EARN/NETNORTH Topology as of 01/18/84 [Forwarded by Ken Laws (Laws@SRI-AI). This (large) message is available for ftp from bitnet.map on RUTGERS, which supports anonymous login. Anyone that can't obtain it by ftp, please send me mail and I'll mail it to you.] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Feb 85 13:14 IST From: Henry Nussbacher Subject: Non computer users use of electronic mail Are there any networks or individual nodes who allow mail to be sent to "non-computer" users? Does mail that is destined for non-existant users go to some high speed printer and then torn off and stuck into an inter-office envelope? What are the pitfalls of such a setup? Is it necessary to assume that all "humans" on the network actually know how to use a computer to receive electronic mail? Is there any RFC standard for sending electronic mail to a node that should be printed as opposed to delivered? Hank Weizmann Inst. of Science Rechovot, Israel ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 02 Feb 85 21:50:48 cet To: HUMAN-NETS@RUTGERS.ARPA From: RMXJITRY%CORNELLA.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA Subject: Computer Ethics Research Hello, I am doing research in the field of computer ethics and computer abuse policies. We here at Cornell University have begun to realize that as we connect our systems and lan's (local area networks) to the larger area networks, the issue of security and abuse becomes a far more complex one than the traditional formulations that we have applied in the past to a student's access to files, resources, etc. On a single machine. we want to establish a rational computer abuse policy here within the next year and a half (to allow time for adequate research and collecting of data from other educational and research institutions). I am collecting information about the abuse of computer network systems, particularly in respect to: Guidelines given to users Access given to student users Steps taken when those guidelines are not followed. Precautions taken to protect the system Precautions taken to detect abuse Clearly, some of those questions you may not wish to answer as they may compromise your system security. Also, the actual definitions of access (particularly in an open system like UNIX) and abuse are difficult to define. I would appreciate receiving (either by computer mail or overseas mail - physical address below) any information that anyone could supply. For example, your experiences in formulating and defining the guidelines that you currently follow, if any. Thank you very much in advance. sincerely, Gligor Tashkovich GLIGOR TASHKOVICH 305 THURSTON AVENUE SEAL & SERPENT SOCIETY ITHACA, NEW YORK U.S.A. 14850-2429 RMXJITRY @ CORNELLA.BITNET ------------------------------ Date: 03 February 85 22:44 EST From: RMXJITRY%CORNELLA.BITNET@Berkeley Subject: Do Computer Environments make a difference? As a follow-up to my request for information above, I would like to pose the following question to all: Does anyone think that there is a difference (in terms of Computer Ethics and responsibilities) of someone learning about computers in an IBM environment (4341's, 3081's - mainframes) and someone learning about computers in a DEC environment (PDP's, DECSTAR's, 2060's, etc.) and finally someone learning about systems in a UNIX environment? Each system is set up with different languages (read: Operating systems) that allow each user a certain degree of flexibility, some in more ways than others - Does this flexibility have ANY bearing on the ethical responsibilities that one assumes when using one mainframe over another? I would be most interested in hearing people's opinions on this topic. Send replies to: RMXJITRY @ CORNELLA.BITNET (using either the Berkeley gateway - BSMTP @ UCBJADE or the Wisconsin gateway - SMTPUSER @ WISCVM) ------------------------------ From: bellcore!r.schatz%b.CC@Berkeley Date: 1 Feb 1985 18:52 Subject: description of Telesophy Project the following project may be of interest to people on human-nets: Telesophy literally means "wisdom at a distance". The goal of the Telesophy Project is to build a system which makes obtaining information as transparent as telephony makes obtaining sound. The system could be viewed as a "WorldNet" browser, which lets one navigate an underlying information space. The information units in the space can contain any type of data and the system hides their actual physical location. In addition to these retrieval facilities, there are also storage facilities for generation of new items from old. The system thus supports the notion of an Information Community, permitting the users to browse for AnyThing AnyWhere and share their findings with others. These notions are old desires, undoubtably familiar to the readers of this digest. What is new is that these problems seem finally about to break because of coming mass availability of new technology. In particular, because of the speed and transmission characteristics of optical fibers, it is now feasible to consider the idea of building what is logically a single computer physically distributed over a wide area. This potentially worldwide single computer provides the hardware upon which an operating environment permitting the transparent fetching and manipulation of uniform objects can be built. My dream is a worldwide information community, a greatly generalized USENET. I work for Bell Communications Research, the central research organization for the local telephone companies (like Bell Labs before the divestiture). The fiber optic telephone network of the near future will likely obtain end-to-end speeds much closer to gigabits/second than the current kilobits. To utilize this, I have been investigating the architecture of a Telesophy System. Thus far, a long paper has been written describing the underlying philosophical and technological issues. I am now actively seeking colleagues to help build a first version on a local-area network of Apollo workstations. For more information, please contact me at one of the following addresses (a fuller description has been posted to net.jobs): Bruce Schatz physical: Bell Communications Research 435 South Street, Room 2A275 Morristown, New Jersey 07960 phone: (201) 829-4744 USENET: bellcore!bambi!schatz ARPAnet: bellcore!bambi!schatz@BERKELEY ------------------------------ Date: 29 January 1985 21:58-EST From: Steven A. Swernofsky Subject: [sasw: [bnl art/human-nets]] The following message is forwarded from the usenet. It appears to address an issue which is quite political, and even emotionally presented. But--it is quite related to the problems of human relations in a network environment. I think it is important for HUMAN-NETS, so please send no flames if you are uninterested in usenet, stargate, moderated versus posted lists, and so on. Date: 22 Jan 85 22:56:48 EST From: Steven Akiba Swernofsky To: sasw Re: [bnl art/human-nets] From: sbcs!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!godot!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax !tektronix!teklds!hercules!franka Wed Jan 16 00:58:10 1985 Path: bnl!sbcs!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!godot!mit-eddie!genrad !decvax!tektronix!teklds!hercules!franka From: franka@hercules.UUCP (Frank Adrian) Subject: WARNING First of all, let me apologize for the multiple post- ings, posting to groups where I am not allowed (net.women.only), and, in general, making a mess of the net. Also, let me say that ALL RESPONSES to this should either use net.news or private mail to me. Again I apologize for the inconvenience, but in this case, due to this mes- sage's importance, I feel this is justified. Also, the opinions posted here are my own and in no way reflect those of my employer or any of its other employees. Primarily, the message is that, unless something is done shortly, this newsgroup may not exist a year or two from now. To understand why requires a bit of history. The USENET was at first a very small net. Being a very small network, the news software was written as an unmo- derated bulletin board system, where anyone could post items thought to be of interest to all. As time went on, the suc- cess of this concept became evident, as shown by the increased number of machines on the news network and the corresponding increased volume of news items. In fact, the volume of news items increased so much that some of the backbone sites were finding it hard to justify the cost of news forwarding over long distance phone lines. A few months ago, a group of network administrators got together and decided to fund a project called "STARGATE". Basicly, this was a sound idea. News sources would be routed to the STARGATE transmitter which would beam the mes- sages to a satellite which would, in turn, relay the mes- sages to more localized network hubs, thus alleviating the need for as many long distance calls. A satellite carrier was found and the plans for designing hardware and software put into motion. Unfortunately, the people who have promoted this scheme could not leave well enough alone. They felt that the volume of "garbage" flowing through the net was too high. They felt that the carrier of these messages might be able to be sued for possibly libelous messages. They felt that this was their chance to play God and they took it. In short, the new network will have no unmoderated news. Any message that is to be transmitted through STARGATE will be screened by a moderator for "suitability of con- tent", "possibility of libel", and other vague criteria which only he moderators will know. You won't be able to protest a bounced message, because the moderator is the only person with a right to relay your message to the STARGATE. If your article is bounced or edited beyond recognition you won't be able to defend yourself - how are you going to get a message past the moderator? In short, you can call it moderation, but it's still a euphemism for censorship. "Fine," you say, "We'll just post it in groups that don't go through the STARGATE." Well, I wish that were pos- sible. Unfortunately, the backbone sites have decided that since they have STARGATE, and all of the "important" groups are there, they don't have to forward news articles in other "less popular" groups. The net, except for STARGATE ser- vice, has effectively been destroyed. The only people for whom the net exists freely is the moderators. The modera- tors decide what are "acceptable" topics for the net. They have the power to say what you can say. The new people in power bleat, "We're saving the net. Without this the backbone sites will desert, anyway." What good is saving the net if only the people in power can enjoy it? If they cared about the net (and not just their cozy little portion of it) they'd fight in their institutions to save it. The news network, as it stands now, is something unique and should not be drastically altered. What can we do about this? I really can't think of much. The net has always been voluntary. One thing is cer- tain, though. As soon as STARGATE goes into effect, the chances for a free network surviving is nil. The institu- tions involved can point to STARGATE and say that there's a perfectly good network right there. There will be very lit- tle chance to start a new network at that time. So the only thing I can suggest is to try to stop STARGATE in any way possible. Let the people who conceived of this know that it is not appreciated. E-Mail bomb them. Flame them until they drop. If you see them in public, spit on them. Hide dog turds in their desks. Disrupt the next USENIX meeting. Check with your local ACLU to see if there are any legal means to stop this. Harass them in any way possible. In the mean time, organize. Let your institution know that you appreciate this service they provide to you. Let them know that any change in the posting criteria of one of the last free bulletin board systems is not appreciated. Set up an alternative network to take this net's place when it folds. Hopefully, there will be a place for unmoderated news posting when this is over. The organizers have been less than honest with you. They hide in net.news (and net.news.stargate), discussing these things which will alter your news service, without generally informing the public. The first you would have heard about it is when backbone sites would have said, "We're not transmitting anything but moderated groups from now on." You wouldn't have been able to stop them. Goodbye, net.women. Goodbye, net.motss. Goodbye, net.singles. Goodbye, net.rec.*. Goodbye, net.flame. Goodbye, every news group that doesn't relate directly with what you do at work, is politically unpopular, or that your administrator just doesn't like. It looks as if a great experiment is coming to an end. But it doesn't have to be this way, if we work together. Save the net. Stop the STARGATE. Don't let them take away a unique and wonderful resource from us. Together, we can stop them. Stop the STARGATE, Frank Adrian ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Jan 85 11:43:00 est From: bellcore!amsler@Berkeley (Robert Amsler) Subject: CDs displacing books However... Nobody I knows takes their copy of the Third International Dictionary, Encyclopedia Britannica volumes, or other expensive books to the beach, or scribbles in them, etc. The CD book will have a role to play. We shouldn't expect new media to eliminate old media; however they create new methods of access. Videotape rock performamces didn't replace audio recordings--but they have added something. ------------------------------ Date: Sat 2 Feb 85 13:14:20-EST From: Wayne McGuire Subject: Xerox NoteCards Apropos the recent discussion about idea processors and general purpose personal assistants appears below a message from Info-Mac about Xerox NoteCards. Can anyone here offer any further information about this product? Date: 24 Jan 1985 7:05:38 EST (Thursday) From: Mark Zimmerman Subject: Xerox NoteCards on Mac? To: info-mac@sumex I just saw a demo of Xerox's NoteCards system and want to tell people about it, so we can start working on a version for the Mac! NoteCards is like an extension of the desktop metaphor: your screen has windows on electronic index cards, each of which can contain text, pictures, etc., and links to other cards. Links can be of various types: references/sourcing, argumentation, proof, refutation, consequences, etc. Cards can be filed in boxes, which can contain other boxes, etc. One can display graphically the links between cards, to get an overall view of the information, or zoom in to look at all the gory details when needed. Esther Dyson wrote about NoteCards in the 31 Dec 84 issue of her newsletter, RELease1.0 ... see that for further impressions. Perhaps if there are experts at Xerox PARC or elsewhere listening they can correct/extend my comments. The Mac's TE and windowing should do a fair fraction of the work for a Mac version/analog of NoteCards ... I am dreaming about writing up a first hack at it in MacFORTH. NoteCards is sort of a multidimensional ThinkTank (or rather, ThinkTank is a 1-dimensional shadow of NoteCards) ... it looks likely to be a great tool for gathering/organizing/presenting complicated data. (Besides other features described above, one can ask NoteCards to search along various types of links to find various items, reorganize links, embed pointers to other cards within the text/picture on a card, etc.) Best, Zimmermann at MITRE ------------------------------ Date: Thu 7 Feb 85 09:03:02-CST From: Werner Uhrig Subject: "Computer Subculture" is topic of Donohoe-TV-show thought I let my fellow-TV-junkies know. if anyone has a chance to tape the show, please let me know, in case I get querries. ------------------------------ Date: Fri 8 Feb 85 03:20:53-CST From: Werner Uhrig Subject: they postponed "Donahue: Computer Subculture" due to more urgent topics ("The New York Subway Vigilante") the computer topic was postponed. newspapers receive the schedule weeks in advance, so they (and I - and you, not to forget) resulted misinformed. sorry. I am trying to find out more about the contents adn timing of the show. ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #6 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-02-20 18:21:38 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Wednesday, 20 Feb 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 6 Today's Topics: Responses to Queries - Computer Ethics Research & Non-computer user's use of Electronic Mail, Computers and the Law - MOG-UR update, Computer Networks - Stargate (3 msgs), Computers and People - CDs vs Books ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: vis!greg@SDCSVAX To: RMXJITRY%CornellA.BitNet@wiscvm.ARPA Subject: Re: Computer Ethics Research Date: 09 Feb 85 11:49:54 PST (Sat) The most important practice I have discovered for supporting good computer ethics and avoiding computer abuse is maintaining a cooperative and fairly open social environment, with administrators and managers in good communication with users and restrictions minimized and downplayed. I have learned this lesson at both industrial and academic sites. This is actually no different from avoiding abuse in other social environments. On systems where computer management is heavy handed or isolated, some users become alienated and try to break system security. In general, the more security is touted, and the more access restrictions are tightened, the harder some users will try to break them. Many computer users are very interested in the systems they use. If most system information is gratuitously off-limits, they will not see any reason not to try to get at it. They quickly get used to breaking security. On more enlightened systems, access restrictions are minimized. Where restrictions must be applied, the users are notified, the situation explained, and their cooperation is requested. It is never implied that the security mechanisms are unbreakable. If anything, it is implied that they are breakable, but users are requested not to. Penalties are never alluded to. Note that this is similar to normal practices of physical security. If people started putting bank vaults in your office, and warning you about the heavy penalties of being caught hunting through other people's desks, etc., it would chill the social atmosphere. Yet with normal (easily breakable) curtesy locks on private materials, few people would consider breaking in. In line with this user oriented viewpoint, the security of personal files should always be a personal matter, with users able to limit the access to their own data from other users AND from administrators. Despite the current lack of legal protection for the privacy of user's data files, user files that are read protected should be treated as you would treat letters left in an employee's desk, i.e., as private. If systems people don't respect a user's privacy, why should a user respect the privacy of system files? As part of maintaining an open atmosphere, both personal and system files should default to being readable by anyone, and users should be encouraged to browse around in order to learn the system better. This is typical on most UNIX systems, and is very educational. When someone accidentally leaves some private matter unprotected, anyone noticing it is likely to send the owner a note letting them know. That's security! I think that as long as the impregnability of computer security mechanisms is not touted, it can be a useful exercise to design them well. Sophisticated users can be invited to try to break them, and to provide suggestions for their improvement. But they should never be counted on. _Greg ------------------------------ Date: Saturday, 9 Feb 1985 11:32:18-PST From: winalski%speedy.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (Paul S. Winalski) Subject: Re: non-computer user's use of Electronic Mail (HNT V8 Subject: number 5) MCI MAIL allows you to send electronic mail to anybody, whether or not they have an electronic mail account. If they cannot receive electronically, or if you elect to send paper mail, MCI MAIL prints your message ans it is sent by U. S. Snail (but posted locally, so presumably it will arrive in finite time). DEC's internal electronic mail system lets you address recipients by name and site code (using site codes the same as for interoffice paper mail). Messages to recipients who do not have computer accounts are printed at the recipient's site and distributed via interoffice paper mail. Both MCI MAIL and DEC's internal electronic mail system are based on DEC's Message Router electronic mail product, which uses the draft NBS standard message format. --PSW ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 9 Feb 85 11:47:27 est From: Larry Kolodney Subject: MOG-UR update From: lenoil@mit-eddie.UUCP (Robert Scott Lenoil) Newsgroups: net.general,net.legal,net.misc Subject: The final resolution of the MOG-UR (Tom Tcimpdis) Subject: prosecution. Date: Fri, 8-Feb-85 22:26:51 EST I plucked this off of ARPANET's INFO-MICRO bulletin board; spread the word far and wide - we have won! --------------------------------------------------------------------- 7AM, 02/07/85: PURSUANT TO A TELEPHONE DISCUSSION WITH REGINALD DUNN, HEAD OF THE CRIMINAL DIVISION OF THE L.A. CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, I WAS INFORMED THAT THE PROSECUTION BELIEVES IT HAS INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO CONTINUE THE PROSECUTION OF TOM TCIMPIDIS, SYSOP OF MOG-UR. THIS DETERMINATION WAS MADE AFTER I REQUESTED A REVIEW OF THE CASE ON 1/11/85 AFTER THE DEPARTURE OF CITY ATTORNEY IRA REINER TO BECOME D.A., AND WHILE THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS BEING RUN BY THE CIVIL SERVICE STAFF PENDING ELECTION OF A NEW CITY ATTORNEY. MR. DUNN HAS GIVEN ME HIS WORD THAT THE PEOPLE WILL SEEK DISMISSAL OF THE CHARGES AGAINST TOM UNDER CALIF. PENAL CODE SECTION 1385, I.E., DISMISSAL IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE. UNDER CALIFORNIA LAW, SUCH A DISMISSAL IS "WITH PREJUDICE" AND THE PEOPLE CANNOT REFILE THE CASE SUBSEQUENTLY. TO PUT IT SUCCINCTLY, A DISMISSAL WILL TERMINATE THE PROSECUTION PERMANENTLY. AS THE MEMBERS KNOW, THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS PREVIOUSLY RENEGED ON REPRESENTATIONS MADE TO ME REGARDING DISMISSAL OF THE CHARGES....I WISH TO ASSURE EVERYONE THAT I HAVE KNOWN MR. DUNN FOR 10 YEARS, AND I TRUST HIS WORD COMPLETELY. IF HE SAYS THE CASE WILL BE DISMISSED, I AM SATISFIED THAT SUCH AN ACTION WILL OCCUR. WE WIN. WIN....WIN....WIN....WIN....WIN....MY THANKS TO EVERYONE WHO CONTRIBUTED TO SUPPORTING TOM AND I IN THE DEFENSE OF THIS MATTER. I CONSIDER THIS TO BE A MAJOR VICTORY FOR THE RIGHTS OF FREE SPEECH OVER THE "BIG BROTHER" MACHINATIONS OF THE PHONE COMPANY. I WOULD BE GRATEFUL IF YOU WOULD DOWNLOAD THIS MESSAGE AND PLACE IT ON OTHER SYSTEMS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY.....THIS IS A VERY BIG VICTORY, AND THE BBS AND MODEM COMMUNITIES SHOULD KNOW ABOUT IT. AGAIN, THANKS FOR THE SUPPORT. BEST WISHES TO ALL, CHUCK LINDNER ATTORNEY FOR SYSOP TOM TCIMPIDIS , 8PM, 02/07/85: THE CASE OF PEOPLE V. TCIMPIDIS, AKA USE A MODEM, GO TO JAIL, WAS DISMISSED IN THE "INTERESTS OF JUSTICE" THIS MORNING, 2/7/85. AS NOTED EARLIER, THIS DISMISSAL IS WITH PREJUDICE, AND TOM IS NOW FREE OF THE PACTEL SCOURGE. ANOTHER SMALL STEP FOR SOMETHING RESEMBLING JUSTICE. CHUCK ------------------------------ Date: Sat 9 Feb 85 12:22:45-PST From: Ken Laws Subject: Stargate To: teklds!hercules!franka%tektronix.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA Wed Jan 16 00:58:10 1985 From: "teklds!hercules!franka%tektronix.csnet"@csnet-relay ... Let the people who conceived of this know that it is not appreciated. E-Mail bomb them. Flame them until they drop. ... Frank Adrian I can't reply to net.news, so I'll put in my two cents worth on Human-Nets. Frank's paranoia is unjustified. I am a moderator on the Arpanet, and my AIList is certainly not restricted to just work-related items. That could change, granted, but so can any network policy. The people with ultimate responsibility in our society are those who pay the bills. If Usenetters want a guaranteed-free unmoderated message stream, they will have to pay for it. Frank's suggestion of a flame-bomb campaign is counterproductive. It is exactly such irresponsibility that will make moderation essential as the net grows. (There are other reasons why moderation adds value to a message stream, but I won't go into that here.) Action will have to be taken against any message source that swamps the system. We cannot allow a few individuals with home computers to tie up the net with millions of messages of any kind, even well-intentioned ones such as "Jesus Saves!". It can be argued that moderation is prior restraint and that offenders should instead be dealt with through legal sanctions after they have committed their offenses. A nice theory, but the net is not currently able to implement such a system. I suggest that a more reasonable model for net lists is that of the legislative council. There are small societies where anyone may get up and say his piece at a council meeting, but as societies become large (or polarized) a need develops to control who has the floor. The luxury of full communicative freedom is lost when the listeners have insufficient time to listen to all that the speakers wish to say; it is then up to a moderator or chairman to insure that each viewpoint receives a fair share of the time available. If all lists must be moderated, power lies in the ability to select moderators. I am not aware of any current restrictions on anyone who wishes to become a moderator and compete with existing lists. Eventually even this priviledge will have to be restricted, but it's far to early to mourn the death of lists as we know them. -- Ken Laws ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 9 Feb 85 19:15 EST From: Dehn@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA (Joseph W. Dehn III) Subject: Stargate Perhaps someone who knows more than I do about Usenet can answer the following questions for us: 1) Who are these "backbone" nodes? How did they get to be such? 2) Are all the managers of such nodes agreed on this plan, or only some? 3) What is to stop other nodes, whose management is in favor of all or some of the unmoderated discussions, from becoming "backbone" nodes? 4) If the answer to (1) and (3) is "money" (i.e., to pay for machine capacity and communications facilities), what is so evil about some nodes deciding that they no longer want to subsidize everyone else? -jwd3 ------------------------------ Date: Sun 10 Feb 85 00:06:13-CST From: Werner Uhrig Subject: Re: [sasw: [bnl art/human-nets]] To: hercules!franka@UT-SALLY.ARPA it is unfortunate that the article by Frank Adrian was posted here 'out of context' as it's contents is 'totally out of whack', so to say (and that's saying it mildly). Anyone interested and with access to USENET should read up on recent messages in net.news.stargate and net.news.groups (as the topic is kind of "old" already, a lot of relevant articles may have been expired and deleted on most systems). I hope, that Lauren or someone else will post a rebuttal here on HUMAN-NETS, but if not, I will eventually expand on the topic to clarify. Generally, I am not in the habit to simply and briefly make condemning statements, but too many reasonable people have already spent too much time and energy on Mr. Adrian's posting, that I try to refrain to add to all that waste. The topic of STARGATE is most interesting, as is the future of USENET, in general. To anyone offended by the brevity of my statements so far, I apologize. Please read beween the lines and try to understand my reasons. PS: I have no part in organizing STARGATE or USENET but am but a simple beneficiary of and participant in discussions on USENET news-groups. PSPS: this is NOT an attack on Steven who brought the topic to the attention of this group (a good idea), nor do I think that Frank Adrian had any but the best intentions for USENET, however, something must have set off his "panick-button". But he probably calmed down quite a bit by now and increased his knowledge on what is involved with STARGATE and why so many people found his posting offensive - he certainly had a full mailbox to help him (-: hmm, thinking about it, and as a matter of courtesy, I'll send him a copy of this with an invitation to comment to this group, if he so desires. Fair enough ?? ------------------------------ Date: Sat 9 Feb 85 14:45:07-EST From: Ken Meltsner Subject: A great, and dangerous, distribution method! With recent advances in CD technology, we can predict the time when CD roms will be commonplace means to store programs. However, how can we distribute individual pieces of software on disks that store 460MB? Any new rom costs ~$1000 for the first one, and only $10 for the rest of them. The solution is simple: A big computer company or software distributor gets the rights to sell a huge number of popular packages. They are put onto a disk in encrypted form. A smart "key" (microprocessor-based decryption key) is then sold for the use of any package. The advantages are clear: there are no more distribution costs. A customer just calls up the distributor, pays a license fee, and receives a key by overnight mail. All of your software is in place, and can be sold for a minimum incremental cost. Updates are easy: every six months (or more often, if necessary) a new CD is sent out. Corporations can contract for huge numbers of keys, with special encryption patterns for really proprietary software. Individuals can get disks with some unencrypted programs or demos of the "locked" versions. This is all based on the adoption of the ADAPSO hardware "key" system for copy-protection, but adds in the idea of pre-distribution of encrypted versions. The main danger is that a large company like IBM or DEC or Apple can lock their customers into their software set. I have a feeling that smaller producers (i.e. anyone with a less complete line of products than Microsoft) will have to band together. In summary: Advantages: 1) Cheap distribution of huge amounts of software. 2) Copy protection. (if keys can't be faked -- or the distributor can have 10000 different patterns to reduce the profit in faking keys.) 3) Easy updating methods, and software won't take up your entire mag disk. Disadvantages: 1) Huge anti-competitive possibilities (if you thought bundling was bad....) 2) Bug fixes are tougher (patch kits on magnetic media?). 3) Barrier to entry for small firms. If this idea is original (at least in its combination of ideas) and anyone out there makes any money on it, buy me a dinner or fly me out to Hawaii to be a keynote speaker. I'm a grad student -- I work cheap! Ken ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #7 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-02-20 20:53:44 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Thursday, 21 Feb 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 7 Today's Topics: Queries - Arpanet Map & Electronic Mail Directory, Responses to Queries - Non-computer electronic mail (2 msgs) & Re: Trying to Reach Someone (2 msgs), Information - VideoTech Mailing List, Computer Networks - Stargate (2 msgs) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun 10 Feb 85 15:00:56-EST From: Vince.Fuller@CMU-CS-C.ARPA Subject: Request for information Does anyone know if there is an online, up-to-date map of the ARPANET (just Internet network #10, not the whole network) online? I am interested in finding out which IMPs are connected to each other and which ones do routing for various parts of the network. Thanks in advance... ------------------------------ Date: Wed 20 Feb 85 06:52:31-EST From: Wayne McGuire Subject: Electronic Mail Directory To: telecom@BBNCCA.ARPA, info-nets%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA Cc: zbbs%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA Does anyone know if any work is underway somewhere to develop an online directory of all electronic mail users and addresses? The online directory of Arpanet/Milnet users at SRI-NIC provides a model of what I have in mind. It would be most helpful if the NIC directory were expanded to include the electronic addresses of users of MCI Mail, Easylink, Compuserve, The Source, Delphi, Bitnet, Usenet, and other computer networks, and made generally available. A directory of all electronic mail users in the world would in fact probably fit handily on one or two laser disks. These disks could be updated monthly, and widely distributed to local nodes and perhaps even to individuals. One might enrich this tool with a natural language interface for searching the directory, and some software which would know the best (if any) route to send mail from one node to any other node on any net. This is a product which is begging to come into existence. -- Wayne McGuire ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Feb 85 12:58:09 pst From: dual!paul@Berkeley (Paul Wilcox-Baker) Subject: Re: Non computer electronic mail systems > Date: Tue, 5 Feb 85 13:14 IST > From: Henry Nussbacher > Subject: Non computer users use of electronic mail > Are there any networks or individual nodes who allow mail to be sent > to "non-computer" users? Does mail that is destined for > non-existant users go to some high speed printer and then torn off > and stuck into an inter-office envelope? What are the pitfalls of > such a setup? Is it necessary to assume that all "humans" on the > network actually know how to use a computer to receive electronic mail? Yes there is. It is known as telex. Users of the system need to be able to do little more typing. Telex messages can also be sent by anyone with a suitable modem and a terminal or computer. Unlike USENET, you do not have to work out the message routing yourself. The only pitfall of the system is that messages seem to be a little expensive per bit. The system can reliably deliver messages to far more people the USENET can do. > Is there any RFC standard for sending electronic mail to a node that > should be printed as opposed to delivered? This is up to the user at the receiving end. Paper is the usual default. It is much harder to lose or forget messages that way. Paul Wilcox-Baker. ------------------------------ Reply-to: VSHANK%WEIZMANN.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA Date: Thu, 14 Feb 85 10:40 IST From: Henry Nussbacher Subject: Need for another reserved userid at all mail nodes Cc: After having posted a request here for information about being able to send E-mail to a person that is not a computer user and have it printed and delivered via internal mail, I received many replies from various people on various networks and I thank all of you. But the one thing that kept reoccurring in all the mail was that each site had a dedicated userid that accepted hardcopy mail, i.e.: John Smith - Room 1212 The userid for the hardcopy capability varied and that was the hitch. I would be forced to remember the hardcopy userid for each node. What I would like to propose is an addenudum to RFC822 to add another reserved userid (in addition to POSTMASTER) and call it HARDCOPY (or anything else people care to agree on). Sites that do not have a HARDCOPY userid will merely return the mail as undeliverable due to 'not valid userid'. Those sites that have a hardcopy facility will print out the mail in their mailroom and have it delivered as a Telex or internal mail would be delivered. Many sites have this capability already but it seems to be localized to a site and not to the network as a whole. In this way, many sites would be able to save alot of their Telex costs. Sound reasonable? Hank ------------------------------ From: decvax!utzoo!lsuc!msb@Berkeley Date: Tue, 12 Feb 85 00:30:54 est Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #4 A.K.Dewdney is on the uucp net, or was a few months ago at least. His address was then: decvax!watmath!deepthot!yndrd decvax talks to Berkeley's ucbvax and other major uucp sites. Mark Brader ------------------------------ Date: 15 February 85 20:51 EST From: RMXJITRY%CORNELLA.BITNET@Berkeley Subject: University of Western Ontari Originally sent from: RMXJITRY@CORNELLA Originally sent to: BOEBERT@HI-MULTICS.ARPA In order to reach someone at the University of Western Ontario I would suggest writing the Postmaster and asking for the userid of this Alexander K. Dewdney. To do this, send mail to the following: postmaster%deepthot.cdn%ubc.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa This routing is for mail coming from ARPANET - it is actually easier to send mail via BITNET to CDNNET - but that is another story. -- Gligor Tashkovich CCS Network Consultant RMXJITRY%CORNELLA.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA ------------------------------ Date: 20 Feb 1985 0029-PST From: the tty of Geoffrey S. Goodfellow Subject: New Mailing List -- VideoTech@SRI-CSL. To: Past HOME-SAT & Video-Disk mailing list people:: ;, To: cc: Zellich at SRI-NIC.ARPA, Telecom at MIT-MC.ARPA VIDEOTECH@SRI-CSL VideoTech represents a rebirth and combination of the HOME-SAT, VIDEO-DISC and TELETEXT mailing lists. Appropriate topics for discussion on VideoTech might be, but not limited to: - Home Satellite (TVRO, DBS) - Cable Television - Video Disc Technology - Video Tape Recorders (Beta/VHS/UMatic) - Teletext - Stereo Television - HighRes Television All requests to be added to or deleted from this list should be sent to VIDEOTECH-REQUEST@SRI-CSL Coordinator: Geoffrey S. Goodfellow [You need to send a message to VideoTech-Request@SRI-CSL if you want to be on the list. Getting a copy of this message doesn't mean your on the list.] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10-Feb-85 14:29:09 PST From: Lauren Weinstein Subject: Stargate Stargate is a project that I developed and implemented as an experiment in conjunction with the Usenix Association. It is still in its very early stages. The message from Frank A. resulted in a massive outpouring of statements against that author and his message, which was not only exceedingly impolite but also massively misleading. I was indeed deluged with mail, but 99.99% of it was totally supportive of the project and urged me to ignore such "comments" and not allow them to ruin the project. I was quite encouraged to see the massive outpouring of support for the project that was triggered (obviously unintentionally) by that message. I can only state that the message in question represented a miniscule percentage of opinion and was to be expected when anything new was presented to a large group of people. Somebody will scream at you about anything. Unfortunately, I simply do NOT have time to bring up all the details and issues here in HUMAN-NETS, nor am I regularly reading this list these days (simply from lack of time). The various issues surrounding Stargate have been discussed in VOLUMINOUS detail (including some very long explanatory pieces by me) to the Usenet net.news and net.news.stargate groups over the last several months. There is simply no way for me to take the time now to try summarize that mass of data. If you have access to Usenet news archives I encourage you to start reading and draw your own conclusions. Be sure to read as much as you can, since some articles present misconceptions which are then corrected in later articles. A very short explanation of Stargate: Stargate is an experiment wherein the technical issues of transmissing Usenet netnews-type materials over the vertical interval of a major cable television satellite service (WTBS) are being investigated. The mode of transmission is being investigated as a adjunct to the current telephone-based transmission schemes. The experiment is still running at this time. Discussions are now beginning between various parties (The Usenix Association, the satellite carrier who controls the WTBS vertical interval, and others) to determine the shape of an actual service (as opposed to an experiment) in terms of resource allocation, specific services, content, liabilities, costs, and a whole range of other topics. Once again, I must emphasize that I do not ordinarily read this list regularly and that I will most likely be unable to respond to comments on this topic in this list. I can only point you at the volumes of material already available on many Usenet systems. The whole project, from my original conception to my installation of the computer equipment in Atlanta, and onward to the present, has been done totally on a volunteer basis, and it has been eating up increasing amounts of my consulting time. As new people join in on Usenet, more and more people contact me regarding the project (questions, comments, wanting to help, wanting to participate) and I simply do not have the time to start another cycle of such discussions here! I am a consultant by trade and the time I spend on Stargate is time that I'm not making money to pay the rent. I will report on Stargate as appropriate in this list as it passes through various phases of the experiment. In the meantime, if you want more information, please see the Usenet net.news and net.news.stargate groups (if you have access to them). Most of the really basic information was sent out a couple of months ago, but many sites should still have it online. Once again, I will most likely be unable to respond to discussions in this list regarding this topic for now. I apologize for that, but the nets have grown far too big for me to conveniently deal with even the volumes of non-mailing-list mail I receive these days, given my high visibility. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: 14 Feb 85 15:50:46 PST (Thu) Subject: RE: Stargate From: peck@sri-spam If the promoters of Stargate are concerned about the satellite carrier being sued for the contents of the messages, then i suggest that that is the issue to attack, not Stargate itself. Is AT&T liable for messages transmitted over the current network? (Is Anaconda Copper liable?) Seems to me that since the source of every message is identified in that message, that responsiblity for that message is already established. If all messages are moderated, then would the moderator be liable !? If you want to avoid the menace of moderated newsgroups, why not direct your efforts toward getting a legislative or judicial ruling on the issue instead of trying to sabatoge future technology. That way, everybody wins. ------------------------------ Date: 13 Feb 1985 09:09-PST From: the tty of Geoffrey S. Goodfellow n047 1202 12 Feb 85 BC-WORDS (Newhouse 003) Take Our Word for It column (Editor's note: Take Our Word for It is prepared by the editors of Merriam-Webster Inc., publishers of Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary. Readers' questions are welcome and should be mailed to Take Our Word for It, in care of this newspaper.) Newhouse News Service ... Dear Editor: My friend is a computerholic; he just can't get enough of his machine. Another friend called him a ''hacker.'' Is he criticizing or complimenting my computer friend? - C.N., Georgia. Dear C.N.: Because the word ''hacker'' has received some bad press in the past year or so, with stories of hackers breaching security into computer systems, the word does have some negative connotations for many people. But the examples of usage in our files suggest this is not the case within the industry itself, where use of the term may actually indicate a degree of awe. So your friend can continue to be a hacker with pride. ... RB END (DISTRIBUTED BY THE NEW YORK TIMES NEWS SERVICE) nyt-02-12-85 1503est *************** ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #8 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-03-02 17:57:40 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Saturday, 2 Mar 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 8 Today's Topics: Query - Collaborated Simulation Systems & Research on Homosexuality, Responses to Queries - EMail Directory (2 msgs) & Re: Trying to Reach Someone, Computers and People - Firewalls (and flames) in Sendmail (2 msgs), Computer Networks - Stargate (2 msgs), Information - Seminars (2 msgs) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 20-Feb-85 23:11 PST From: Kirk Kelley Subject: query -- collaborated simulation systems To: works@rutgers,ai-list@sri-ai,smaug@rutgers,Info-Graphics@AIDS-Unix I would like to hear about any simulation or modeling system in existence or planned that would support multiple users/modelers or has a particularly nice graphic modeling language (like an upgraded MacProject but) for editing iterated difference equations. A game system would be ok. I will summarize the responses I get to the net. -- kirk ------------------------------ Date: 25 Feb 85 22:52 +0100 From: Kurt_Ernulf%QZCOM.MAILNET@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA Subject: Research on homosexuality This notice is part of a feasibility study to investigate the possibility of using computer based message systems and conferences to exchange information about topics within the behavioral sciences. For the moment we are preparing a doctoral dissertation at the Psychology Departement, University of Gothenburg, Sweden, and as our research subject will be in the area of human homosexuality, we have chosen that as topic for the feasibility study. Is there anybody working with research on homosexuality, that might be interested in starting a mailing list for conferencing about the topic? Please reply to Kurt_Ernulf%QZCOM.MAILNET@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA or to Sune_Innala%QZCOM.MAILNET@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA ------------------------------ From: adrion%ucbingres@Berkeley (Rick Adrion) To: MDC.WAYNE%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA,info-nets%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA, To: To: telecom@BBNCCA.ARPA Subject: Re: Electronic Mail Directory Cc: zbbs%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA I am sure the folks at the CSNET-CIC will soon reply, but the main problem with nameservers is getting the initial data and keeping the database updated. The NIC uses site liaisons (and the directory is inaccurate, although pretty good), the CSNET nameserver has individuals maintain their own entries (unfortunately there are fewer than one would like). On ARPANET most sites support "finger" a protocol which allows you to ask a site for a persons mail id (you have to know the site). ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Feb 85 12:21:31 CST From: Mike Caplinger Subject: network cartography To: Wayne McGuire , To: To: Vince.Fuller@CMU-CS-C.ARPA I made an attempt to locate information about the node names and geographic positions of various network hosts. The results so far are: 1) BITNET is well mapped. They have a lat/long database with hostnames. 2) Somebody can map the ARPAnet, since the ARPA directory has a geographic map in it. I was unable to find anyone who had the data, however. (I tried the NIC and various people at SRI.) I have a database with mailing addresses and phone numbers that could perhaps be turned into a lat/long database. 3) The data exists for some USENET nodes, but I couldn't find anyone who had it. I picked up rumors of a project to build a lat/long database, and I know that a poll of sites was done where lat/long was one of the questions, but I don't know where the results ended up. Since links matter in this net, there is an ongoing project to determine the links for purposes of auto-routing. 4) I haven't tried CSNET, but am interested in it. Again, I've seen maps in the monthly CSNet newsletter, so the information exists. I guess looking at BBS systems and electronic mail users would be interesting, but I have no idea where to start. You could always tap everyone's phone looking for carriers, but this seems undesirable :-). - Mike ------------------------------ Date: 21 February 85 13:33 EST From: RMXJITRY%CORNELLA.BITNET@Berkeley Subject: Retraction To Whom It May Concern: I apologize for adding "CCS" to the bottom of my note in the last issue of human-nets. It should have read either "Volunteer Network Consultant" or "Free-Lance Network Consultant." My apologies to those who were upset by my omission. -- Gligor ------------------------------ Date: 19 February 85 22:27 EST From: RMXJITRY%CORNELLA.BITNET@Berkeley Subject: Firewalls (and flames) in sendmail (Also forwarded by: Greg Skinner ( gds@mit-xx.arpa | gregbo%houxm.uucp@harvard.arpa) Originally sent from: MCB@LLL-TIS.ARPA Originally sent to: RMXJITRY@CORNELLA Return-Path: <@MIT-MC:mcb%lll-tis.ARPA@lll-tis> Date: Mon Feb 18 21:24:36 1985 From: mcb%lll-tis.ARPA@lll-tis (Michael C. Berch) Subject: Firewalls (and flames) in sendmail To: header-people@MIT-MC.ARPA Cc: cak@Purdue, mas@Purdue Well, my posting about denying Internet access to students seemed to hit a raw nerve at many sites. Mail is running about 70% in favor of my comments (the tenor of which were to leave well enough alone) and the remainder were opposed, on the various grounds of security, network/gateway capacity, policy, or DoD-related rules. From cak@Purdue: > It's late, and maybe I shouldn't be responding in my tired state, > because I'm going to flame, but why did you send such a useless > reply to the list? We have a real problem, need some help, and you > try to tell us that we should just ignore it. Why must you > question our motives? The reply WAS meant to be useful, and I stand by it. My comment was that you may not have a problem. Many times I have posted a question of the form, "How can I do X?", and gotten the reply that for whatever technical/administrative/commonsense reason, I really DON'T want to do X. And I am thankful for it. > Maybe it's escaped you, but the DARPA Internet is a *research* > network. Our sponsoring agent has specified that ONLY research > users should be allowed access. Therefore we have to put together > some firewalls. It's not a question of cycles or bandwidth. It's > policy. I can understand that if you have an ARPANET sponsor breathing down your necks, yelling, "GET THOSE %#$@&#@ STUDENTS OFF THE NET!!" and threatening to yank your funding and DARPA authorization, that's one thing. If that's the case, you truly have my sympathy, and I agree that you certainly don't need my smug assertions about comity. But if not, I'd wonder why you would want to make it an issue. It doesn't take too much close reading of the headers of many of these lists to determine that many institutions have granted more or less general access to the Internet -- for mail purposes -- to their local networks. It is also evident that ARPANET and MILNET gateways and hosts are carrying a fair amount of off-net traffic, much of it destined for UUCP, CSNET, and BITNET nodes. Anyway, the volume of mail (and the intensity of the opinions expressed therein) leads me to believe that student/casual access to internetwork mail service is a problem that isn't going to go away. I believe, as many do, that freedom of information flow should be paramount, and that the value of an internet increases with the number of persons accessible. On the other hand, there are real concerns about resource consumption, security, and network sponsor policy involved. So, what are people doing about this? Are there alternatives that preserve access to the internetwork community while balancing policy concerns? Is this a problem or a non-problem? My apologies for the long posting. Perhaps this discussion should move elsewhere, like info-nets? ---- Michael C. Berch mcb@lll-tis.ARPA {akgua,allegra,cbosgd,decwrl,dual,ihnp4,sun}!idi!styx!mcb ...!idi!lll-tis!mcb ------------------------------ Date: Mon 25 Feb 85 02:20:23-EST From: Greg Skinner Subject: [Mark Shoemaker : Re: Firewalls in sendmail] Part 2 of the "mail access to the Internet" discussion currently on header-people. Greg Skinner gds@mit-xx.arpa gregbo%houxm.uucp@harvard.arpa {allegra,cbosgd,ihnp4}!houxm!gregbo --------------- Return-Path: <@MIT-MC:mas@Purdue.ARPA> Date: Sat, 16 Feb 85 01:19:06 est From: Mark Shoemaker To: mcb@lll-tis.ARPA (Michael C. Berch) Cc: header-people@MIT-MC.ARPA Subject: Re: Firewalls in sendmail ---------- > Why not relax and enjoy it? I wish we could -- but allowing approximately 4500 undergraduate students access to the ARPAnet (even if only through mail) seems, uh, unwise. I'm curious: are there any schools out there that give unrestricted ARPA mail access to all their students (and will admit it)? Mark ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Feb 85 10:20 CST From: Giebelhaus@HI-MULTICS.ARPA Subject: Stargate I agree with Ken Laws that Email bombing is not going to do any good. I disagree with the statement that Usenetters will have to pay for a "guaranteed-free unmoderated message stream". New is a very cheap fringe benefit to give to your employees. It can be limited to a some disk space and after hours CPU time. The structure of the usenet is fundamentelly different than ARPAnet. Each site contributes as much as they like and no one can be kicked off the network (unless no site in the world will allow them to dial in). Also, moderation is a potential form of censorship that the usenet has chosen not to implement. Most control is in the form of peer pressure and there is seldom a need for anything more. If there is, the site's administrator is contacted. They do not wish anymore control and there is no reason to have any more control. I can't answer all of Joseph Dehn's questions, but speaking as an administrator of a site that has recently gotten on the usenet and will soon receiving news, I can say their is no reason for backbone sites at all. They will make the news go faster but it will still make it without them. What was the point to Werner Uhrig's message? Was he saying that Frank Adrian's message did not reflect the truth? I feel that Frank's message did make a lot of good points. If backbone sites require moderation, it will hurt the usenet, though I don't think destroy it. Lauren didn't address the moderation issue, but I feel peck@sri-spam had a great suggestion. What is the answer to the liable question? A lot of the news we get on the arpanet comes from the usenet so this does affect us. Perhaps some who can read net.news and net.news.stargate could summarize what is happening. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Feb 85 11:54:54 pst From: dual!fair@Berkeley (Erik E. Fair) Subject: Legal Issues concerning USENET Quick summary in answer to the question of who's sue-able over the content of messages on USENET: The USENIX Association retained a law firm to do some research into this area, and one of the senior partners in the firm gave a report at the last USENIX Conference, last month in Dallas. The USENET (legally) can fit into either of two existing classifications: 1) A Common Carrier 2) A Broadcaster but it does not fit clearly into either because it is a new sort of beast. As I understand it, Common Carriers (e.g. AT&T, MCI, US Postal Service) are not responsible for the content of the information that they transmit from place to place. Broadcasters (e.g. ABC, WTBS, NPR) are subject to regulation by the Federal Communications Comission, and are responsible for the content of the information that they transmit (i.e. no obscenity, pornography, etc.). USENET is different in that it uses the techniques of a Common Carrier to achieve the effect of a Broadcaster. USENET is a store-and-forward network, wherein any message will eventually reach all points in the network (unless the distribution is restricted; there are a number of restricted distributions covering specific geographic areas (e.g. the S.F. Bay Area)). Clearly we wish to be considered as a Common Carrier, and not a Broadcaster. Stargate changes things in that we would be using the methods of a broadcaster to achieve the effect of a broadcaster, and it pushes the nature of USENET more in the direction of a Broadcaster (legally) and there would be an apparently singular source of all submissions (not really the case, but the casual observer might assume so) which would be subject to legal attack in a way that no singular USENET site is today. The suggested solution to this problem is one that has been in use on the ARPA INTERNET for quite some time (but for somewhat different reasons): moderation of content. As all of you are probably aware, the HUMAN-NETS digest is moderated by Charles McGrew of RUTGERS. He has been doing it for about the last two years (I think it has been that long), and has done an admirable job (Take a bow, Charles). The INTERNET community has never really had problems with this format (at least none I've been aware of in the last four years that I've been a user of the INTERNET), and so the issue of moderating a list is mostly concern over timeliness of the mailing. Not so on USENET. There has been great hue and cry that ``moderation'' is just another word for ``censorship'', with the many bad connotations which that word has. And, of course, the USENET has the same problem that the INTERNET community has in finding good, willing moderators. I don't know what the resolution of the discussion will be, but I'm in favor of moderated groups because in general they present (at least on the INTERNET) a higher quality level of content with reduced quantity (e.g. when someone asks, ``Does anyone know foo?'' the moderator takes one or two of the best answers and includes them instead of *all* replies received). I'm hoping that this sort of moderation will see a proper test on the USENET and will flourish. Erik E. Fair ucbvax!fair fair@ucb-arpa.ARPA dual!fair@BERKELEY.ARPA {ihnp4,ucbvax,cbosgd,hplabs,decwrl,unisoft,fortune, sun,nsc}!dual!fair Dual Systems Corporation, Berkeley, California ------------------------------ Date: 25 February 1985 22:48-EST From: Steven A. Swernofsky Subject: [JOHN: Seminar] MSG: *MSG 3738 Date: 02/25/85 13:08:39 From: JOHN at MIT-XX Re: Seminar Date: Mon 25 Feb 85 13:09:42-EST From: John J. Doherty Subject: Seminar To: bboard@MIT-MC.ARPA cc: john@MIT-XX.ARPA SEMINAR Date: February 28, 1985 Time: Refreshments 9:45 A.M. Seminar 10:00 A.M. Place: NE43-512A TELESOPHY Bruce R. Schatz Bell Communications Research Morristown, New Jersey The vision of universal, uniform access to the world's information has intrigued people for a long time. A system which provides "telesophy", wisdom at a distance, would be an operating environment for the WorldNet. It would enable users to navigate information space: browsing transparently through physically distributed data, selecting items of current interest, and packaging them for sharing among members of the information community. Re ------------------------------ Date: 28 February 1985 22:46-EST From: Steven A. Swernofsky Subject: [hamscher: Seminar -- "Telegluttony"] To: AILIST @ MIT-MC MSG: *MSG 3754 Date: Thu, 28 Feb 85 15:02:20 est From: Walter Hamscher To: *mac Re: Seminar -- "Telegluttony" COMPUTER AIDED CONCEPTUAL ART (CACA) SEMINAR Date: March 1, 1985 Time: Refreshments 12:00 Noon Place: 3rd Floor Theory Playroom Hosts: David Clemens & Sandiway Fong TELEGLUTTONY Bruce S. Printztein Big Mama's Telephone Company Asbury Park, New Jersey The vision of universal, uniform access to a free lunch has intrigued graduate students for a long time. A system which provides "telegluttony", eating at a distance, would be a feeding environment for the WorldTrough. It would enable graduate students to navigate goody space: browsing absently through physically distributed refrigerators, selecting morsels of currant interest and squirreling them away for later consumption. <> ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #9 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-03-02 19:48:57 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Sunday, 3 Mar 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 9 Today's Topics: Responses to Queries - Network Directories & Information on Xerox NoteCards, Computer Networks - Stargate (2 msgs), Computers and People - Re: Interesting Net Anecdotes, Information - Message Systems Symposium Announcement ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 24 February 85 13:23 EST From: RMXJITRY%CORNELLA.BITNET@Berkeley Subject: Re: Request for informatio Originally sent from: RMXJITRY@CORNELLA Originally sent to: VINCE.FULLER@CMU-CS-C.ARPA Hi, Have you tried asking NIC @ SRI-NIC.ARPA They maintain the ARPAnet Network Information Desk - so they should have what you are looking for. -- Gligor Tashkovich RMXJITRY%CORNELLA.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA ------------------------------ Date: 1 Mar 85 17:41 PST From: Halasz.pa@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Information on Xerox NoteCards To: Info-Mac@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, AIList@SRI-AI.ARPA This description of the Xerox NoteCards system is a response to inquiries that have recently appeared on several Arpanet discussion lists. A. Background: NoteCards is part of an ongoing research project in the Intelligent Systems Lab at Xerox PARC investigating "idea processing" tasks, such as interpreting textual information, structuring ideas, formulating arguments, and authoring complex documents. The NoteCards system provides an on-line environment for carrying out this research. The principal reasearchers involved in this project are Frank Halasz, Tom Moran, and Randy Trigg. NoteCards is implemented in Interlisp-D and runs on the Xerox 1108 family of Lisp processors. B. The System: NoteCards is intended primarily as an idea structuring tool, but it can also be used as a fairly general database system for loosely structured information. The basic object in NoteCards is an electronic note card containing an idea-sized unit of text, graphics, images, or whatever. Different kinds of note cards are defined in an inheritance hierarchy of note card types (e.g., text cards, sketch cards, query cards, etc.). On the screen, multiple cards can be simultaneously displayed, each one in a separate window having an underlying editor appropriate to the card type. Individual note cards can be connected to other note cards by arbitrarily typed links, forming networks of related cards. At present, link types are simply labels attached to each link. It is up to each user to utilize the link types to organize the note card network. Within a note card, a link is represented by a small, active icon. Clicking with the mouse in the icon, retrieves the target card and displays it on the screen. NoteCards includes a filing mechanism built around a special type of card called a FileBox. In each FileBox are filed (i.e., linked by a Filing link) zero or more note cards as well as zero or more other FileBoxes. FileBoxes serve as a kind of categorization hierarchy for filing note cards by "topics". Browser cards contain node-link diagrams (i.e., maps) of arbitrary pieces of the note card network. Each node in a Browser's node-link diagram is an active icon that can be used to retrieve the indicated card. Spatially organized information is also available in the form of Sketch cards that allow the user to lay out line drawings, text, and link icons in an arbitrary, zoomable 2-D space. NoteCards is an environment that integrates several packages already available in the Interlisp-D system, e.g., TEdit, Grapher, and Sketch. NoteCards has a full programmer's interface. All of the functionality in NoteCards is accessible through a set of well-documented Lisp functions, allowing the user to create new types of note cards, develop programs that monitor or process the note card network, and/or integrate new Interlisp packages into the NoteCards environment. C. Research directions: NoteCards was designed primarily as a research vehicle. The following are some of the research topics that we are pursuing using the NoteCards system. 1) User tailorability -- a system description language that a non-programming user could edit in order to tailor the system to his or her task and/or interaction style. 2) Argumentation -- use of a "truth-maintenance" mechanism to help users develop and manipulate alternative argument structures. 3) Psychological issues -- investigations of the ways in which NoteCards does or does not support real-world tasks. 4) Visual summaries of large networks -- investigations of other ways to display network maps, including fish-eye graphs, trimmed graphs, 3D graphs, indented outline, etc. 5) Multi-window management -- investigations of various abstractions for building general multi-window management tools that take advantage of inter-card dependencies. 6) Querying networks of cards -- design of a querying interfaces that allow users to ask questions about the contents and structure of a network. 7) Multiple user, interlinked NoteFiles -- providing distributed/shared NoteFiles with links between different NoteFiles. 8) Alternative documents -- explore alternative document concepts, such as guided tours (i.e., suggested paths through a network of cards). 9) Text retrieval -- investigate several methods for doing text retrieval based on full-text search and statistical matching. 10) Object-oriented implementation -- we are investigating the possibility of rewriting NoteCards in Loops. D. How to get more info: A technical paper on Notecards is in progress. For information about the research issues surrounding NoteCards contact Halasz.pa@Xerox or Trigg.pa@Xerox. NoteCards is not at this time a Xerox product. However, Xerox Special Information System's Vista Laboratories offers a limited licensing agreement aimed at distributing NoteCards to groups doing related research (Contact: NoteCardsInfo.pasa@Xerox) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21-Feb-85 14:57:19 PST From: Lauren Weinstein Subject: more on Stargate I said I wasn't going to discuss this here, so I'll just say the following. ALL of the points that people are bringing up have already been hashed out in excruciating detail over on Usenet. The issues involving moderation revolve around a number of very complex topics, including (but not limited to): 1) Resource allocation -- The bandwidth of the satellite channel is limited. There wouldn't be the room to send all the stuff from the growing Usenet for long even if it were completely legal or we wanted to. 2) Info and Costs -- The quality of material on Usenet has been going downhill rapidly as more and more people have joined in. Short, meaningless messages, long repetitious messages that include the full text of other long messages only to add a one line "I agree" at the end, personal attacks, possibly libelous or copyrighted materials, etc. More and more people have been dropping more and more newsgroups since they don't have the time to wade through all the muck to find an occasional gem. People would have to pay something for Stargate (as they pay for Usenet phone calls now). Many major sites are fed up with paying many, many thousands of dollars for junk and would appreciate the option of instead subscribing to something with a bit higher quality. Those of you who only know how things work on ARPANET don't know how bad things can get in a gigantic, almost totally unmoderated forum like Usenet which is undergoing uncontrolled and explosive growth--and where virtually every message that every user posts to netnews goes to ALL sites. 3) Liability issues are not clear. The telco model is not appropriate -- broadcasting models appear closer to the mark. Given that there is no way with the current Usenet to authenticate the author of a message, the responsibility goes back to the entity making the postings possible. Lawyers who have looked into these issues have noted that while there are a number of possibilities, it is unclear how things might finally turn out. In the meantime, nobody associated with the project has the money to get into court battles that would almost certainly be appealed by the losers to higher and higher courts--so that sorta lets out trying to get definitive rulings regarding communications responsibility from this project. Court battles in that area will wage on for years. Let some entity with lots of bucks and lawyers fight that out. While they're at it, they can fight out peripheral issues such as whether or not public key cryptosystems represent legal user authentication in all cases. In the meantime, my own opinion is that Stargate should be run something like a publishing operation. Just as any newspaper, magazine, or newsletter takes responsibility (and takes suitable precautions) for what they print, this might be the model for an operational "service" (right now we have a "simple" experiment, not a service). It is the price that is paid to publish meaningful and useful information instead of an endless stream of random and repetitious writings, from anyone and everyone who wants to see their name in print in front of lots of people. Even the ARPANET digest moderators are taking on some responsibility. Of course, these nets have pretty low visibility right now, but something like a Stargate Service would have much higher visibility and thus be a much more likely target for people disturbed over the content of transmitted materials, regardless of the actual legal liability issues. All of the factors above are important and must be considered when looking at this topic. I will now fade out of this discussion in this list. I hope. --Lauren-- P.S. An interesting situation (purely addressing the liability issue) is computer BBS's. While the recent MOG-UR case was dropped, it appears that the people who think this represents some sort of general "victory" for anyone are probably mistaken. The case was dropped by the prosecution (reluctantly) since it was only based on a single offending message. It appears likely that cases will still be filed if there is a pattern of abusive messages. They just didn't have enough evidence in the PARTICULAR case under discussion. There are also some other interesting cases already underway, including one involving BBS's being used by anonymous Neo-Nazis for various purposes. Both Canada and the U.S. are involved in this latter case, which once again addresses complex liability issues that will take many years to straighten out. --LW-- ------------------------------ Date: 26 February 85 18:11 EST From: RMXJITRY%CORNELLA.BITNET@Berkeley Subject: (copy) mail volume, etc. Originally sent from: RLK@MIT-OZ Originally sent to: RMXJITRY@CORNELLA Date: Tuesday, 26 February 1985, 15:53-EST From: Robert L. Krawitz Subject: mail volume, etc. To: info-nets%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA I've received a fair number of replies to my inquiry about mail volume. Here are my conclusions. 1) There are a fair number of people who do in fact have problems with mail volume. There are lots of us who don't, but I think that as a matter of courtesy we try respect the needs of the entire list. 2) Most people are not in favor of a digest (those that have responded, anyway). Some people just don't like digests, some can't undigestify them. It seems to be bitnet people who have the most problems; can anyone on bitnet undigestify messages? (Can anyone run a digest?) 3) Most people seem to like the idea of people voluntarily restricting their mail. The problem here is individual cooperation. My responses to the problem are: 1) I personally like the idea of people voluntarily reducing their output. I am willing to meet them halfway by collecting all all inquiries and batch-mailing them to the list, say, every week. They won't be in digest format, so you'll just have to look through them somehow if you want to answer questions. This would be a special mailbox, say info-nets-inquiries, and I'd just mail the accumulated mail file every week and delete it, making no promises. 2) I particularly find distasteful the repeated mailing of requests (such as happens occasionally). What I think happens is that the original inquiry doesn't show up in someone's mailbox as quickly as s/he thinks it should, and impatiently remails the inquiry. This is very thoughtless. Mail sometimes is slow, say when oz or mc goes down (which isn't that infrequently). 3) I urge people not to reply to inquiries to the entire list, unless they are things that are of interest to the entire list, or a significant fraction thereof. Specifically, replies of the form "Here's how to mail to site foo on net bar". Just reply to the sender. 4) Please don't send mail of a general flamy nature to this list. There is another list that specializes in flamage about networks called human-nets (requests to human-nets-request@rutgers.arpa). No one ever gave me permission to give out that, but I doubt anyone will care too terribly much. That includes things such as is it politically the right thing to restrict access, etc. Comments should be addressed to info-nets-request. I hope that people will think seriously about this, as I don't like to see people forced to leave because of excessive, unnecessary mail volume. Robert Krawitz info-nets-request@mit-mc ------------------------------ From: Eugene Miya Date: 1 Mar 1985 1720-PST (Friday) Subject: Thank you, note I would like to thank those members of the Usenet and human-nets-digest who respond to my posting for interesting network stories. Today I was informed by my Division chief that approval of my invitation to China was turned down. The justification was that the benefit to NASA did not match the cost. I was invited on an office automation delegation whereas NASA's chief engineer was invited on a space delegation [note: OA is not my area of research, I only have an interest]. In my place, because of this newsgroup, Doug Englebart and his wife are able to attend. Doug has had a long standing interest in China, and because a fellow mutual friend give my net address to Doug, he received a special invitation. An interesting net story in itself. I will pass the information I have collected on to Doug if he wants it. Meanwhile, I have to scramble to get an abstract to the Cray User Group meeting ... in Stockholm... in my research area, cheaper and easier to justify. Thanks again. --eugene miya NASA Ames Research Center emiya@ames-vmsb {hplabs,ihnp4,hao}!ames!aurora!eugene ------------------------------ Date: 25-Feb-85 22:45 PST From: William Daul - Augmentation Systems - McDnD Subject: The Second International Symposium On Computer Message Subject: Systems Announcement The following was reproduced (without permission) from an outline sent to the IFIP Working Group 6.5 members from: Ronald P. Uhlig Northern Telecom, Inc. 2100 Lakeside Boulevard Richardson, Texas 75081 USA If you are interested in submitting a paper, please send the proposed title and proposed authors to Mr. Uhlig, ASAP. Full papers for review will be require no later than 15 April 1985. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- The Second International Symposium On Computer Message Systems will be held in Washington, D.C., 4-6 September 1985. Since the first symposium, held in Ottawa, Canada in 1981, very significant progress has been made in the field of message systems. In 1981, IFIP Working Group 6.5 had just defined a basic mail/messaging model. The X.400 series of standards for Message Handling Systems (MHS), based on the IFIP Model, has now been developed by CCITT, and comparable standards have emerged from ISO. This has opened up the possibility of creating a worldwide network of interconnected message systems. Many new systems, both public and private have come into being since 1981, and the electronic mail industry is growing rapidly. On going work in IFIP, CCITT, ISO, and other bodies in Directory Services, Document Exchange, and other areas promise to make MHS and the new standards even more important in the future. Since we are now entering a new era in electronic mail, the time is right to hold a major international symposium on Message Systems. The purpose of the symposium is to exchange information, discuss technical, economic, and legal issues, and explore impacts of message systems on the people and organizations which use them. Papers are desired in the following topic areas: Interconnection of Computer Based Message Systems (CBMS) Interconnection of Public & Private Message Systems Interworking among systems following standards Interworking between existing systems and new systems Interworking of CBMS and Telematic Services Interworking with TWX/Telex and physical delivery Document & Message Architectures Document Structuring: Revisable forms and final forms Document Interchange & Document Content Conversion Message Exchange Protocols Message Content Protocols Voice Messaging Integrated voice and text messaging Multimedia CBMS Multimedia Message (Data, Voice and Image) Graphics vs. Facsimile in messages Multimedia Message Workstations Multimedia Message standards and protocols Interworking of multimedia systems with single media systems Multimedia message demands on subnetworks Message content conversion (voice<-->text) Use of MHS Standards as a Foundation for Other Services Message Systems as base for distributed office system applications Extensions to MHS, e.g. Conferencing, Electronic Publishing, Business Data Interchange ... Vertical CBMS Applications Industry specific standards Electronic Funds Transfer Applications in transportation, law, medicine and travel Directory Services, Naming and Addressing Public Policy Issues In Computer Messaging Privacy, Confidentiality, Authentication and Security Legal Status of CBMS Social and Behavioral Impacts of Message Systems Impacts on Developing Nations Corporate/Organizational Messaging Systems Multinational private message systems Internal corporate standards and strategy Efficiency and Cost/Benefit Impact on Administration and Management User Environment User Interface Issues Message Editing Messaging for the Handicapped Human Factors Integration with Office Automation Tools CBMS Implementations & Experiments Experiments and Evaluation of P1, P2, & P3 protocols New Products and Services CBMS as an Industry Microeconomics Macroeconomics Industry projections--domestic & international Other topics relevant to Computer Based Message systems will receive full consideration. PROGRAM CHAIRMAN: Ronald Uhlig -- USA PROGRAM VICE-CHAIRMAN: Richard Miller -- USA ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #10 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-04-09 22:15:40 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Wednesday, 20 Mar 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 10 Today's Topics: Queries - Looking For Someone & Common terminal rooms & AUTODIN & Lapsize computers, Computers and People - Stargate (3 msgs), Information - Biogas Computer Conference ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 4-Mar-85 10:42 PST From: William Daul - Augmentation Systems - McDnD From: Subject: LOOKING FOR A HP PERSON I would like to make contact with one or more people that work for HP. Please send me a note. I have a question about HP mail systems/networks. Thanks, --Bi\\ ------------------------------ Date: 4 Mar 85 15:47:52 PST (Monday) Subject: Common terminal rooms From: Conde.osbunorth@XEROX.ARPA I'm interested in knowing the effects of private terminal rooms compared to common terminal rooms (some called them bullpens). People in school and in some companies often start programming in a common room with lots of other people, but later on they get their own offices and move away. They may have officemates, and can still talk to each other in hall ways (or on the system), but the feeling is not the same. I saw a lot of cooperation between people when they do work together. Do you see any pros/cons to common rooms? I think there are many advantages that are ignored. Daniel Conde conde.pa@Xerox.ARPA ------------------------------ Date: 7-Mar-85 00:40 PST From: William Daul - Augmentation Systems - McDnD From: Subject: AUTODIN query To: mailgroup@ucl-cs.arpa Cc: info-nets%mit-oz@mit-mc.ARPA I am looking for someone that might consider themselves well informed regarding the structure of AUTODIN mail items. I need information (document numbers etc.) on the format line specs. Please send me a note if you think you can steer me in the right direction. Thanks, --Bill ------------------------------ Date: 13 Mar 85 08:51 +0100 From: Jacob_Palme_QZ%QZCOM.MAILNET@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA Subject: Lapsize computers There is growing interest among our local users in the subject of "Lapsize computers" and we have a fairly active local conference on the subject. Maybe, someone should start a mailing list on Arpanet on that subject? (Our local site, QZCOM, is not suitable as the main host of a mailing list since we are not directly connected to ARPANET.) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2-Mar-85 21:13:27 PST From: Lauren Weinstein Subject: Stargate and Moderation I personally favor the increased use of moderation on all the nets since I see no other practical solution to rising traffic volumes from more and more people. As I asked recently on another list, what happens when there are so many people on the networks that every simple query yields 2 or 3 THOUSAND polite responses and several hundred mindless flames and catcalls from the fringes? Not even Stargate has unlimited bandwidth (by no means) and many people don't have the time or disk space to sort through the ever growing quantity of messages, many of which are repetitious, even now. But for now, let's look only at the very narrow issue of legal liability. One thing that the Usenet lawyer told me, that she unfortunately didn't mention in her report, was that common carrier status would only be even theoretically achievable in such a situation if all users submitting material were authenticated. In other words, common carrier protections do not allow every party to indefinitely pass back responsibility saying "we don't know who sent the message," at least not in a situation like that with which we are dealing. This means a fundamental change in the way messages are submitted if they are going to be unscreened in terms of content, and possibly signed statements from potential submitters accepting responsibility for their submissions. Frankly, I see this as a very high price to pay to avoid accepting the same responsibility that any newspaper, magazine, TV station, or club newsletter takes when it publishes or broadcasts material. And in fact, Usenix has said that they are not necessarily opposed to accepting such a responsibility, but they do want to understand all of the issues involved. More recently, some additional potential concerns with unmoderated material submission have appeared. If Stargate were to truly accept any and all material without screening (and note that if you make ANY distinctions based on content, you take on the full broadcasting responsibility anyway) we might find ourselves in the situation where we'd be flooded with "high value" messages from businesses who would choose to use the free (or comparatively cheap compared with commercial services) Stargate data path rather than other (expensive) satellite communications facilities. Messages to branch offices, commodity data, and all sorts of other stuff (probably encrypted by the source) could be sent into the system, and we couldn't do a thing about it. The result of such an unmoderated conduit could be a "cheapy" satellite distribution system that is so overloaded with commercial traffic that there's no room left for the netnews type messages which were the original purpose! Even if you charged for each message submitted, it seems very likely that the commercial operations would have lots more money to spend for buying message time than the typical netnews person. And frankly, I'd like to avoid controlling submissions to Stargate based on the size of your pocketbook. The richest people don't necessarily have the most useful things to say. Anyway, it's a pretty complex set of issues. A totally unmoderated channel could be subjected to massive abuse. But if you make any traffic judgements based on content you accept responsibility. And if you can't authenticate the source, you also accept responsibility. My own feeling is that the best way to approach the whole venture is like a publishing operation, where the desires of the people receiving (paying for) the service, the goals of the service, the bandwidth of the communications channel, and all other related factors are included in the equation to try create the most useful possible operation for the most people. And of course, nobody would be forced to join the service or stop receiving any other information services or sources. A Stargate service would simply be another alternative. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Mar 85 10:52 CST From: Giebelhaus@HI-MULTICS.ARPA Subject: Stargate To: Lauren Weinstein I think there is a place for both moderated and unmoderated news. Some months ago, while I was at the University of Minnesota, I did read news. I did not feel the need for moderation then. I think that over 225 newsgroups are enough to let people read only the groups they are interested in. While I did not read net.flame, I did have to put up with some junk. I was and am willing to pay that price for the freedom to state my views and be able to read other peoples. One man's junk may be another man's gem. I consider the news a service and, perhaps, also an experiment. I enjoy reading the endless stream of useful, insightful ariticles. I think it is important to see all views, even if I think some are stupid. If I want to read a magazine (that can hardly help but reflect the editor's biases), I'll go to the news stand and buy one. If each moderator had to take full legal responsibility for what they published, they might soon find a need to hire a laweyer. Since they are not charging for their service, how could they afford that. Most papers and magazines have a whole battery of laweyers. I don't understand Lauren's statement that the ARPANET digests have a lower visability. The ARPANET digests travel both around the ARPANET and are re-broadcasted on the USENET. Perhaps he has a way to find out that it has lower number of readers than some other groups. If the survey that RLK@MIT-OZ took is an accurate sampling for the network community, I dare say that the network community does not want the "service" Lauren envisions. [I don't consider Human-nets a place to "flame" about networks, though.] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6-Mar-85 13:55:30 PST From: Lauren Weinstein Subject: stargate (very brief) Since so much of this has already been covered in the netnews newsgroups, I won't repeat it all here. 1) The Stargate service (or whatever) is not primarily oriented toward Arpanet, where most people get everything for "free" and are usually on good-sized computers with plenty of disk. It is oriented more toward the Usenet community where massive phone bills, filling disks (many on small machine), and a massive surge in (low value) submissions has created what is approaching a crisis situation. ARPANET lists, of course, can continue on merrily until the IMPs melt. And in fact, the Usenet netnews groups will continue also. Stargate would offer an alternative choice. 2) When I say that the ARPANET lists have low visibility I mean to the public at large. A copy of the LIST-OF-LISTS in the hands of a reporter interested in how the government spends its money is what I'd call "high visibility." I'm sure that many of you can imagine the impact. 3) My own surveys indicate that there is overwhelming support for Stargate and for moderated news in general, both among the Usenet population at large and particularly among the people that pay the bills. This latter group, in particular, is the one that must make the decisions about what stays and what goes in the netnews arena, ultimately. 4) You don't need gangs of lawyers to run a magazine. Does every club that publishes notes from their members have a big legal staff? Of course not. Almost any group that would run a service already has a lawyer on retainer and would almost certainly get the conventional liability insurance for such situations. 5) I have discussed the complexities of content issues, legal liability, and resource allocation in the past. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: 06 Mar 85 14:08 +0100 From: ENG-LEONG_FOO%QZCOM.MAILNET@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA Subject: 2ND BIOGAS COMPUTER CONFERENCE 1985 *********************************************************** FOR IMMEDIATE PRESS RELEASE 2nd Biogas Computer Conference (25-29th March 1985) ********************************************************** The UNEP/UNESCO/ICRO Microbiological Resources Center (MIRCEN) at Stockholm jointly announces the 2nd Biogas Computer Conference, with the Commission of the European Communities (Belgium), the Computing Center (QZ) of Stockholm University (Sweden) and the University of Guelph (Canada). This computer conference will: (a) permit the electronic discussion of some 60 biogas papers and posters which will be presented at the 3rd EC Conference on Energy from Biomass in Venice (b) facilitate online participation by the less fortunate researchers and lab assistants who are unable to be at the conference site in Venice (c) enable the Venice participants to acquaint themselves with the computer conferencing system (COM) at QZ (d) encourage discussions with members of the Telenetwork for Anaerobic Digestion. If you are interested to participate, please Contact: Name: Department: Tel: ********************************************************** Dear Members of the HUMAN-NET, POSTMASTERS, and Friends, 2000 copies of the detailed announcement of the 2nd Biogas Computer Conference have already been mailed to biologists and bioengineers. The problems that these people oftenface are that they do not have access to a terminal, they are unaware that such facilities are available at their own universities and they are not familiar with the use of computer-based message systems. I would therefore greatly appreciate your help if you could help those interested to get online. Please then mail a copy of the above announcement (with the name of a person to be responsible for contact and his/her telephone no:) to Departments of Biological Sciences (and others like Microbiology, Agricultural Engineering, Appropriate Technology, Energy Research, Biotechnology, Waste Treatment, etc.). Your help would thus enable interested persons to receive or submit entries in the discussion of technical papers in the 2nd Biogas Computer Conference in COM via mail networks. Interested persons could also get an account in the COM system at QZ and connect to it via packet-switched networks (TELENET, TYMNET, IPSS, TRANSPAC, DATEX-P, etc). I also hope that your efforts to help others will create positive effects for additional funding for such activities in your department in future. For more information and submission of entries to the conference, please write to ENG-LEONG_FOO . ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #11 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-03-27 22:45:40 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Thursday, 28 Mar 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 11 Today's Topics: Responses to Queries - Lapsize Computers & Programming Environments (3 msgs) & AUTODIN, Computer Networks - Stargate (2 msgs), Information - MIT Communications Forum seminars ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed 20 Mar 85 10:25:32-PST From: Ken Laws Subject: Lapsize Computers The March issue of IEEE Spectrum reports (on p. 91) that there is now a monthly newsletter covering the smallest portable computers. To get PICO -- The Briefcase Computer Report for a year, send $14.97 to PICO, 150 South Main St., Wood Ridge, NJ 07075. -- Ken Laws ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Mar 85 13:34 CST From: Boebert@HI-MULTICS.ARPA Subject: bullpens If you don't have some kind of a common room, one will be designated by the project team: somebody's office, a wide space in the hall, or the pub down the street. So there is no question whether; it is just a question of where. I personally do not like to do keyboard entry where there is a lot of a chatter, and I think a lot of people would agree with that. My ideal would be a quiet room for terminals with a large lounge attached. The old "make ready" room in the basement of Encina Hall at Stanford was like that (the lounge being the wide space in the hall between the make ready room and the in box for your card decks -- yes, children, I said card decks) and I have fond memories of it, mainly because it is where I met my wife. Not all side effects are negative. ------------------------------ Date: 20 Mar 85 14:10:30 PST (Wednesday) From: CharlieLevy.es@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Re: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #10 To: Conde.pa@XEROX.ARPA At Xerox, most of us are "entitled" to have private offices, but for years, I have chosen to share my office with an office mate. We "own" two offices, but both sit in one (with our displays and keyboards), and have both cpu's in the other, thus eliminating fan and disk noise. We rewired at our own expense. 8 x 10 ft is a little tight, but worth it. I think staring at a screen for a whole day can be unhealthy, and some human interaction is necessary. Sharing an office, we get to chat, ask each other technical questions, find out about each other's projects, meet each other's friends and visitors. The ONLY disadvantage, since our office is so quiet, is when we need to make VERY personal calls. At these times, we either transcend our need for privacy (perhaps a good goal in itself) or wander down the hall looking for an empty office from which to make a call. It's a bit of a hassle for management. Some office-mates are incompatible, or at least uncomfortable. Once, when we HAD to share offices during a space crunch, I HAD to back out because of incompatiblity. Management has to cope with employees wanting to do their own "matching", rather than throwing people together by project. I think that the cross-pollination between projects is a good thing, and worth the hassle that management has to go thru. Charlie Levy ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Mar 85 12:06:40 cst From: Richard Smith Subject: common terminal rooms I've worked in common rooms and in private rooms both in industry and in universities. If someone is employing me to work with their computers, then it's a waste of everyone's time and money to NOT provide a terminal on my desk. I'll assume that's not the question. The problem with common rooms is that they succeed or fail depending on the people involved. It's one thing if you all start out at the same time and develop good working relationships as you learn together. But what if you're walking into a new situation where your ignorant questions are seen as a 'loud disturbance'? In the wrong atmosphere there can be even less interaction in a bull pen than on a floor of private offices where the doors are usually open. The problem with any kind of shared office space is that you need customs to prevent disturbances that keep work from being done. This can easily get very restrictive. Other than in the very special case where everyone is in a learning mode, I can't think of any advantages to being in a bull pen. Are there any that are an attribute of the space and not of the people? Rick. ------------------------------ From: Willis Ware Date: 20 Mar 85 11:33:00 PST (Wed) Subject: Re: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #10 In reference to the request for format details on AUTODIN, the source of all wisdom and knowledge on DIN is the Defense Communications Agency in Washington, 8th and Courthouse Road, Arlington (I think it is), VA. From the DoD phone book, here are some phone numbers that might help you: Public Information Officer 703/692 2051 Chief of Staff 703/692 0912 Defense Switched Network PMO 703/696 5759 In the long run, of course, AUTODIN will give way to the Defense Data Network which started with the splitting apart of the military users of the old ARPAnet into the MILNET. "Long run" means a gradual exnlargment of DDN until DIN is dismantled. The date of the latter is not yet specified, sofar as I know, but it's bound to be in the 90s at earliest. Willis H. Ware ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Mar 85 09:35:54 cst From: werner@ut-ngp.ARPA (Werner Uhrig) Subject: Tickler: quickie status-report of STARGATE-project [ if readers of this group who have no access to USENET-newsgroup net.news.stargate let me know of their interest, we can forward the most interesting messages on a regular basis. Werner ] From: lauren@vortex.UUCP (Lauren Weinstein) Newsgroups: net.news.stargate Subject: quickie status report Date: Wed, 13-Mar-85 07:13:04 CST Date-Received: Thu, 14-Mar-85 01:31:27 CST Organization: Vortex Technology, Los Angeles Lines: 29 Xref: seismo net.news.stargate:177 Just a very short note. The reason you haven't heard too much lately is that we've now entered a "slower" phase in the project where a variety of issues regarding organization and internal technical issues are being hashed out. I'm currently waiting for the first of the new production data decoders to become available for my direct testing. Unlike the big rack-mount type unit I'm using now, the new unit will resemble a set-top cable TV box and should include remote addressing, error correction, and decryption facilities. Its small size will enable me to test it in a variety of locations with much less hassle than the current old style decoder entails. Test data (a variety of canned netnews messages) continues to flow over the satellite channels 24 hours/day. I recently ran decoder tests at Lucasfilm (San Rafael) and got a 0% error rate from the suburban cable that serves the facility. I hope to test for error rates in very highly urbanized and very rural areas soon. I am now receiving the test data from Stargate at a steady 1200 bps on vortex (I have removed the artificial sleeps on the sending side that I had installed before the Usenix demo in Dallas) and I'm finding that vortex is usually able to keep up with the data even without flow control. The next big step will probably occur when the new decoders start becoming reasonably available--this will make possible the early creation of a small "test network" of sites which will be able to receive the transmitted test data. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Mar 85 17:19:12 pst From: Michael C. Berch Subject: Stargate/Common Carrier Liability I wonder what level of sender authentication is reasonable to meet the requirements of common carrier (vs. broadcaster) status. The canonical examples of common carriers in telecommunications are telephone companies and telegraph companies. There's no way that a long distance carrier can tell who is the originator of a long distance call that was delivered to its toll switch by a local operating company. Similarly, I can appear in person at any Western Union office and send a telegram and sign it any way I want, and I will not be required to show identification. In neither of these cases is the carrier likely to be held liable as a broadcaster of the content of my communications simply because they are unable to authenticate the source. Whatever shields carriers like WU from liability in the case where a person sends defamatory/tortious communications (possibly over a false signature) to a large group of people should, it seems to me, shield Stargate as well. ----- Michael C. Berch mcb@lll-tis-b.ARPA {akgua,allegra,cbosgd,decwrl,dual,ihnp4,sun}!idi!styx!mcb ...!idi!lll-tis!mcb ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Mar 85 11:27 EST From: Kahin@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA Subject: April-May Communications Forum seminars Massachusetts Institute of Technology Communications Forum Wideband Metropolitan Networks: CATV and Alternative Possibilities April 4, 1985 Stephen Weinstein, Bell Communications Research New business and residential communications services will require wideband metropolitan networks with capabilities beyond those of present telephone and cable television facilities. This seminar will describe the technical and political problems of building these capabilities into existing CATV systems and discuss present and proposed techniques including hybrid systems using the telephone network. It will review the advantages of a distributed star network architecture and high bit rate optical fiber and discuss how these technologies are being introduced by telphone companies, CATV, and other communications providers. Possibilities for advanced services on a future network of this kind will also be considered. Resource Sharing in Local Area Networks April 10 (Wednesday), 1985 Leonard Kleinrock, UCLA Distributed systems present a number of fascinating challenges, not the least of which is the problem of allocating system resources to an unpredictable demand stream. This problem was presented to us in the form of wide area computer networks in the l970's and faces us in the form of local area networks (LANs) at present. The key issues and principles of resource sharing in LANs will be discussed including, for example, topology, access method, and medium. The seminar will also review how these problems have been resolved in current products and consider some likely new solutions. Telecommunications Developments in Europe April l8, l985 Peter Cowhey, University of California at San Diego Eli Noam, Columbia University The divestiture of ATfT and regulatory policies favoring competition in long-distance telephone service have had a profound effect outside the United States -- especially in other highly developed countries: Japan, Canada, and the larger nations of Western Europe. In Europe, the traditional PTT (Post, Telephone, and Telegraph Administrations) monopolies have been questioned. British Telecom has an officially sanctioned competitor, and BT itself has been privatized. While other countries have not officially moved as much toward the American model, private companies have entered new areas on the fringe of traditional core services. Although impetus for policy change often derives from general arguments for deregulation and competition, much is also made of the need to stimulate European industry in order to export to the burgeoning American market. Encoding Voice Signals April 25, l985 Bernard Gold, MIT Lincoln Laboratory Robert McAulay, MIT Lincoln Laboratory Robert Price, M/A-Com Linkabit, Inc. Although not visible to the public, vocoders (VOice CODERS) have been around for a long time. To date, however, technical difficulties and cost have limited their use to such applications as secure communications for the military. This seminar will discuss the historical development of vocoders, why they have been used in the past, and the potential they have for enhancing public communications systems. Long Distance Land Lines May 2, l985 Gus Grant, Fibertrak additional speaker to be announced (note: to be held in Building 34, Room 401A) With deregulation of long distance communications in the United States, several corporations have announced ambitious plans to build long distance land lines. Collectively, these plans portend a dramatic increase in long distance capacity. This seminar will discuss the market forces driving this expansion and the business strategies of some of the major competitors. New Directions in Media History May 9, l985 Douglas Gomery, University of Maryland Morris Dickstein, Queens College David Thorburn, MIT New approaches to the academic study of film and other forms of mass media have gained prominence in recent years, as the methods of traditional disciplines such as history, literature, cultural anthropology, and economics have begun to be applied to contemporary audiovisual texts. Centrally interdisciplinary, this emerging media scholarship promises new perspectives on the cultural significance of media texts and institutions and powerfully revises conventional accounts of their historical development. Marlar Lounge MIT Building 37, Room 252 70 Vassar Street, Cambridge Thursday, 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. (except as noted) ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #12 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-04-01 22:34:57 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Monday, 1 Apr 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 12 Today's Topics: Responses to Queries - Lap Computer Magazines & Physical Programming Environs, Computer Networks - Stargate and Common-Carriers & A Daily Electronic Newspaper, Computers and People - Questionnaire on Electronic Communication ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu 28 Mar 85 21:47:33-PST From: Doug Subject: Lap Computer Magazines TRULY PORTABLE: the lap computer newsletter covers the Radio Shack Model 100 and the NEC PC-8201A and other portable computers. The first issue includes a directory of software, hardware, and accessories for portable computer owners, plus a program to count the number of characters in a text file (a useful utility for a lap portable owner), a revised version of the NEC character-defining program plus the Russian alphabet, and other useful stuff. The second issue contains book reviews, info on the new NEC Starlet and the Tandy 200, programs to deal with mailing lists (print envelopes, make address stickers, etc.), a discussion of punctuation in BASIC, etc. Oh, the first issue has a program that turns the number keys into "piano" keys -- fun stuff. A subscription is $16 per year for 10 issues; a sample is $2.50 by first class mail to TRULY PORTABLE, PO Box 2916, Oakland CA 94609. Coverage will expand during 1985 to include the Epson Geneva (to be reviewed in issue #3) and the HP-110 and probably other portables. ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 1985 12:51:37 GMT (Friday) From: Jon McCombie Subject: physical programming environs I have seen psychological studies that "prove" that programmers are more productive and happier in all the different types of environments: bull-pen, cubicles, semi-private offices, and private offices. The studies were commissioned by the upper-level managements of different software-producing companies, and (not so surprisingly) "prove" that the environment in effect at that company is the "best". In my experience, programmers strongly prefer private offices. I've worked in a number of different physical programming environments: large terminal room, small terminal room, semi-private office with a terminal shared with an office mate and a terminal room as a backup, a private office with a private terminal, and an environment with private terminals in "cubicles" separated by partitions. By far, the most pleasant and productive environment is the private office with private terminal. This arrangement allows social interaction when appropriate/desired: I have but to wander down the hall and poke my head in my friend's doorway. If I am concentrating and don't want to be disturbed, I close my door. This arrangement allows me to ask questions of my colleagues when needed (via e-mail or telephone or personal visit), but encourages me to look things up myself before asking/bothering someone else. The argument most often made for more open office arrangements ("bull-pen" or cubicles) is that ideas are more readily shared. This is true, but must be weighed against the sometimes significant personal dissatisfaction felt by the people working there. When I'm working, I really don't want to be disturbed by people's questions, or a discussion of what people did last Saturday night, or a discussion of software engineering (one of my favorite subjects...). I want to work. When I sit in a terminal room or in a cubicle, I invariably put on my WalkThing with the volume high enough that I can't hear what's going on around me. While this affords me some modicum of privacy, I resent having to resort to escapism. There are some who actually *prefer* to be in a bull-pen environment, though in my experience they are a rather small minority. I would be interested in hearing the reasons of someone who so prefers. Enough flamage. Further comments? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28-Mar-85 14:34:20 PST From: vortex!lauren@rand-unix (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: common-carriers The analogy breaks down pretty quickly. First of all, we have the fact that the courts might be completely unwilling to consider something like Stargate to have true common carrier status (since its very nature involves the broadcast of information to many parties). If such a decision were made after someone had filed suit about some message(s), the potential liability could be very high. You can't just assume that all decisions would be favorable when you don't have the financial resources to fight prolonged court battles--you have to take some steps to protect yourself in advance, as do magazines, newspapers, and the smarter BBS operators. Once again, the BBS analogies seem closer to the mark--and even the proposed California law that would give BBS's more freedom implicitly assumes that you can identify each message sender so that they can "take responsibility for their own messages." It appears that the courts view differently the case of a carrier that has as its main purpose the sending of a message from one party to another party, from one that primarily sends from one party to many parties. In the latter case, the courts seem to generally assume that "reasonable care" is taken to avoid the sending of "illegal" or "libelous" materials. In the case of no screening, if materials were being broadcast by satellite to hundreds or thousands of points 24/hrs day, the odds of a court ruling that reasonable care was not taken would seem to be quite high. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat 30 Mar 85 15:23:13-CST From: Werner Uhrig Subject: Ziff-Davis announces plans for daily electronic newspaper [ from the Austin American Statesman - March 30, 1985 ] Ziff-Davis Publishing Co. said Friday it will begin a daily newspaper about the computer business that will be distributed electronically to subscribers with personal computers. The COMPUTER INDUSTRY DAILY, to appear each business day beginning this summer, will cost $1,500 a year in the US. It will be distributed in Japen, Western Europe, Asia and Latin America. Reports will be delivered electronically and in hardcopy format by MCI Mail. ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 1985 16:19 EST (Fri) From: Deborah Estrin Subject: online questionnaire Online Questionnaire: Inter-Organization Networks Computer-based communication and resource sharing ACROSS organization boundaries are the focus of my doctoral research in the MIT Lab for Computer Science. As a test case, I am studying the effects of INTER-ORGANIZATION NETWORKS on communication among Research Laboratories. I am seeking responses to the following questionnaire. The 5 multiple-part questions are all short answer or multiple choice. And as you will see, because I am primarily interested in detecting patterns of change, the questions do NOT require ultra-detailed answers. Please do take the few minutes to respond; it takes most people between 5 and 15 minutes. All information will be treated confidentially. You may respond online (to estrin@mit-xx) by inserting your responses after each question or by numbering your responses. Or respond on paper by printing the questions double spaced and writing in or numbering your answers; send to Deborah Estrin, MIT, 545 Technology Sq, Cambridge MA, 02139. If you have responded to this questionnaire already, thank you and please ignore this duplicate. --------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTE: I refer to electronic mail, file transfer, remote login, database, and other computer-based communication mechanisms as INTER-ORGANIZATION NETWORK (ION) FACILITIES. Telephone, face-to-face meetings, and postal mail are referred to as TRADITIONAL MEDIA. EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS are government, university, or industrial laboratories outside of your company or university. 1) EXTERNAL INFORMATION AND RESOURCE SHARING: a) During an average work week, with about HOW MANY EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS do you exchange work-related information (e.g. research ideas, tools and techniques) or resources (e.g. equipment, software, data bases, computer services) VIA ION FACILITIES ? If the answer is 0, please skip to question 4. b) About HOW LONG AGO did you first begin using ION facilities to communicate with these and other external organizations? (number of months or years) c) Since you began using ION facilities, is the NUMBER OF ORGANIZATIONS with which you share information or resources less, the same, or greater than it was when you used only traditional media? d) Since you began using ION facilities, is the NUMBER OF RESEARCH PROJECTS that involve information or resource sharing with external organizations smaller, the same, or larger than it was when you used only traditional media? e) To what extent do you attribute the changes indicated in (c) and (d) to the use of ION facilities? (not at all, some, quite a bit, very much) f) Identify the individual organizations with which you exchange work related information or resources via ION facilities most intensively; select no more than 3 or 4. Assign a code letter to each one (i.e., a,b,c) and indicate whether each is a university(u), government(g), or industrial(i) lab. Bulletin boards and distribution lists do NOT qualify as organizations per se; please do not include more than one of these among the 3 or 4 organizations. 2) COMMUNICATION AND ACCESS PATTERNS: Respond to the following questions by listing each organization's code letter (assigned above) followed by the appropriate answer for that organization. a) Approximately HOW MANY people in EACH of these organization do you communicate with via ION facilities during an average work week? b) Since you began using ION facilities, is the NUMBER of people that you communicate with per organization less, the same, or greater than it was when you used only traditional media? c) HOW OFTEN do you communicate with people or machines in EACH of these organizations via ION facilities during an average work week (0 times, 1 time, 2-5 times, 6-10 times, more)? d) Since you began using ION facilities, is the FREQUENCY of communication with each of these organizations less, the same, or greater than it was when you used only traditional media? e) Since you began using ION facilities, do you communicate with each of these organizations via TRADITIONAL media less,the same,or more than you did when you used only traditional media? f) For each of these organizations, which of the following INFORMATION and RESOURCE TYPES do you exchange via ION facilities ? INFORMATION: (1)research ideas (2)research results (3)joint authorship comments (4)information for solving a particular problem (5)information about tools and techniques (6)administrative scheduling (7) Other, please specify. RESOURCES: (8)software (9)computer resources (10)remote applications (e.g.,Macsyma, VLSI tools) (11)database (12)Other, please specify. (List each organization's code letter followed by the appropriate numbers.) g) For each of these organizations, indicate if the average amount of EACH INFORMATION and RESOURCE TYPE exchanged per week is less, the same, or greater than it was when you used only traditional media. h) Since you began using ION facilities to communicate with these outside organizations, has your communication with outside organizations that are NOT accessible via ION facilities changed? Indicate if the average amount of EACH INFORMATION and RESOURCE TYPE exchanged with the non-ION organizations is less, the same, or greater. i) Which of the information and resource types do you exchange with people INSIDE your organization via internal computer facilities ? j) For each of the external organizations that you communicate with via ION facilities (identified in 1f), which of the following CLASSES of INFORMATION and RESOURCES do you exchange via ION facilities ? INFORMATION: (1)publicly available (2)available in internal documents only (3)related to unpublished research (4)related to unreleased system or product (5)proprietary (6)Other, please specify. RESOURCES: (7)widely available (8)limited (9)costly (10)critical for internal operations (12)proprietary (11)Other, please specify. k) For each of these organizations, indicate if the average amount of EACH information and resource CLASS exchanged per week is less, the same, or greater than it was when you used only traditional media. l) To what extent do you attribute the changes indicated in (b),(d),(e),(g), (h),(k) to the use of ION facilities? (not at all,some,quite a bit,very much) If appropriate, provide a separate response for each of the 6 questions (b,d, e,g,h,k). 3) CONTRACTS AND RESTRICTIONS a) What kinds of AGREEMENTS exist between your organization and each of the individuals or organizations that you communicate with via ION facilities? (none,informal,consulting contract,joint development contract,other specify) b) Indicate if these agreements differ from the agreements governing relationships that use only traditional media (no difference,more explicit conditions,more protective,more exclusive to other organizations,more open-ended or illdefined,other please specify) ? c) Indicate if any of the following factors significantly INHIBIT your using ION facilities more extensively (destinations inaccessible,inconvenient, poor performance,confidentiality of information,company policy,none, other please specify) 4) BACKGROUND: a) About HOW MANY RESEARCH PROJECTS are you working on currently that involve regular contact with persons in organizations outside of your own company/university ? b) During an average work week, with about HOW MANY EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS do you share work related information or resources (via either traditional or ION facilities) ? c) Which aspect(s) of research/development do you work in, primarily? (software, hardware, theory, systems, applications, other please specify) d) Which job category do you belong to, primarily? (manager,faculty, scientist, research staff, technical staff, other please specify) e) How often do you use a computer of some kind in conjunction with your work? (daily,several times a week,once a week, monthly, other, please specify) f) What is the name of your organization? (university or company name and department or laboratory name) 5) COMMENTS: If you use ION facilities in interesting ways that the above questions have not touched upon, please describe them here. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you very much for your time! Deborah Estrin ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #13 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-04-02 21:06:53 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Tuesday, 2 Apr 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 13 Today's Topics: Response to Query - Work Environments, Computers and People - Digital Utility Centers, Computer Networks - World Ear Project, Information - Seminars (2 msgs) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 2 Apr 85 09:17 EST From: Damouth.Wbst@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Re: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #12 Re: Jon McCombie's comment: There are some who actually *prefer* to be in a bull-pen environment, though in my experience they are a rather small minority. I would be interested in hearing the reasons of someone who so prefers. If there are high-productivity programmers who actually *prefer* a bull-pen, I too would like to hear from them. I have trouble believing such people exist. /Dave ------------------------------ Date: Wed 20 Mar 85 08:34:59-EST From: Wayne McGuire Subject: Digital Utility Centers To: info-micro@BRL-VGR.ARPA, videotech@SRI-CSL.ARPA It's become apparent in recent weeks that the bottom has fallen out of the home computer market. Whether the collapse in demand for home computers will equal in severity the videogame bust of a few years ago is still an open question, but that possibility must be taken into account. A column by Fred D'Ignazio in the April Compute! suggests what is required before home computers become as common as the telephone: namely, the massive and seamless integration of a number of technologies--videodiscs, optical fibers, expert systems, portable laptop computers, speech recognition, videotex, the Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN), integrated software, artificial intelligence, satellite communications, speech synthesis, natural language understanding, television, telephony, etc. D'Ignazio argues that as powerful as the new generation of micros appears compared to what was available a few years ago, microcomputer technology, and its Worldnet environment, will have to improve by many orders of magnitude before micros become an appliance for the masses. He may have a point: From Compute!, April 1985, pp. 138-140: Experts predict that a real home computer will not appear until computers are integrated into all aspects of people's lives, including banking, shopping, working, communicating, and entertainment. A real home computer will not sit alone on a desktop and look like a typewriter plugged into a TV set. Instead, it will be a hybrid machine--part TV, part telephone, part videocassette recorder, and part stereo system. It will be the brains of a general-purpose digital utility center that a family operates to hear music, watch movies and TV, make phone calls, control household appliances, and pay bills. The home computer of the present is made up of awkward, ill-fitted, and confusing components. The day its components fuse together into a single digital utility center that is sold at discount supermarkets, it will truly become a mass-market device. The digital utility center will come in a single box and plug into the wall with a single cord. The center's audio, video, and computer software will be uniform and standardized (in some kind of optical or magnetic format), and will play everything--from educational games to Bruce Springsteen to the latest Burt Reynolds movie. All the recordings will be digital and capable of being stored on a single, high-density storage device. All programming will be in English and will consist of making simple choices from a menu of selections that appears on a screen and are read to the user aloud by the center's synthesized voice. Input will be from a keyboard, light pen, mouse, microphone, or touch screen, depending on the individual's preference. No technical knowledge whatsoever will be needed to operate the center. And the center will come with one- to five-year warranties, full service contracts, and modular, replaceable parts. When the digital utility center arrives, the home computer will really be a mass-market appliance. But when computers have become digital utility centers, they will no longer be computers. To paraphrase Joseph Weizenbaum, a digital utility center to a computer is the same as a vacuum cleaner to an electric motor. Before we see consumers going wild over digital utility centers, a lot of separate developments have to take place. Audio, video, communications, and computer hardware must evolve much further and become more integrated, digital, compatible and inexpensive. Software for the separate devices has to be integrated under a single multimedia operating system and has to adopt a standardized storage and data interchange format. In addition, the software must have a friendly, human-like mouthpiece that deals with us in our natural, spoken language and is not only user-friendly but also user-forgiving. The software will have to fill in the gaps in people's commands, correct their typos and misspellings, not let them make any serious mistakes, hold their hand as they work their way through a task, and anticipate what they will want to do next. Most important of all, a mass-market home computer will require a reliable, universal communications network that links the digital utility center into very-high-speed satellite channels that support two-way instantaneous transmission of voices, music, video images, computer-generated pictures, text, and numerical data. This network, too, must be standardized, instantly available at the push of a CALL button on the digital utility center, and invisible to the user. Only when such a network is in place will the digital utility center become popular with a majority of consumers. Only then will all the pie-in-the-sky promises of computer enthusiasts become possible. Such a network will make it possible to do home banking, telecommuting, shopping at home, and attending courses and classes at home. People will be able to purchase all the new records, movies, computer software, and books over the network and have them downloaded into into their local mass-storage device or into a portable computer that they can detach from the main unit and carry with them when they travel. The lesson in all this is that our vision of the home computer has been too limited, and that's why we keep having false starts. Our vision has been limited by the fact that we are still too close to the computer's birth; we are still too familiar with the computer's early stages and functions to see what it may ultimately become. We are only now beginning to move beyond the image of the computer as a computing engine that juggles numbers and processes paychecks. But we must go much further. We must see the computer as only a part of the digital revolution of all human media--voice, music, art, graphics, film, literature, and so on. As all science, art, technology, and communications are digitized, the computer assumes a central role as a translator among the media, and as a terminal linking human beings to the media and to each other. The computer should enable the average person to enter information in any medium (pictures, voice, text, whatever) and instantly translate it (at the discretion of the person) into any other medium--or into several different media. It should then enable the person to send the package to any other person. Likewise, anyone who uses a computer should have instant access to all media in any format they wish. This sounds extremely abstract, so picture the home computer of the future as the United Nations Building. It will have two major functions: translator and terminal. It will house all the disparate streams of digitized information representing all the different media, and it will translate them back and forth at the needs and whims of the user. And it will be plugged into the outside world (of cultures, peoples, nations, and institutions) and capable of vital two-way communication with that world in any language that is appropriate. ------------------------------ Date: 25 Mar 85 23:05 +0100 From: Richard_Friedman_PSR%QZCOM.MAILNET@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA Subject: World Ear Project from KPFA-FM in Berkeley Ca. (Text 96800) 85-03-20 20:53 Richard Friedman PSR (several receivers) Lines: 45 Subject: World Ear Project - An Invitation to All. ------------------------------------------------------------ This is an open invitation to all COM participants around the world to also participate in the World Ear Project, currently being organized by the Berkeley (California) non-commercial VHF radio station KPFA . The goal is to produce a series of radio programs (monthly for now) using ambient sound material recorded by people around the world and sent to KPFA. These programs are currently being aired on KPFA (program #2 is March 25) and will be distributed later to other radio stations in the US and, hopefully, around the world. With the recent advances in tape recorder technology, very hight quality recordings (in stereo) can now be made by the general public on cassette recorders costing $200 to $400. Ten years ago, when I started the Project (it lasted only a few months then) this quality was available only at the high end of the portable tape recorder market, for more than $1000. We at KPFA have now revitalized the World Ear Project after noting that there was already a growing number of recording enthusiasts trading tapes of sounds from exotic (and not so exotic) places. What better way to reach a world-wide audience than thru COM! So here we are inviting anyone to participate who has one of these high quality cassette or reel-to-reel stereo portable recorders., to go out into the field (city streets, open places, buildings, etc.) and make extended recordings of the "sonic landscape", send them to us, and they will become part of our programs. Send tapes to World Ear Project Music Dept. KPFA-FM Berkeley, CA USA 94704 Due to the meagre budget we have to work with, we cannot return the recordings, so make a copy for yourself and send us the originals. Include written information about the landscape recorded and about the recording process itself. We will let you know if it gets included in a broadcast and when. We'll also send you a World Ear Poster, currently being printed. For more information, send me COM mail. In or next program, on March 25, we will be broadcasting the sounds of the streets of Tunis, a sunrise near Darwin, Australia, frogs and crickets at Harbin Hot Springs, in Northern California, the sounds of a hospital in Los ANgeles, etc etc. (Text 96800)------------------------------ (1 comment) ------------------------------ Date: 28 March 1985 02:32-EST From: Steven A. Swernofsky Subject: [JOHN: Fredkin Seminar] MSG: *MSG 3856 Date: 03/27/85 17:23:43 From: JOHN at MIT-XX Re: Fredkin Seminar Date: Wed 27 Mar 85 17:27:12-EST From: John J. Doherty Subject: Fredkin Seminar To: bboard@MIT-MC.ARPA cc: john@MIT-XX.ARPA SEMINAR DATE: April 1, 1985 TIME: Refreshments 1:50 P.M. Seminar 2:00 P.M. PLACE: NE43-512A COMPUTER COMMUNITIES SEMINAR SERIES COMPUTATION AND SOCIAL SYSTEMS Prof. Edward Fredkin M.I.T. Chairman: Fredkin Enterprises, S.A. ABSTRACT The social organization of a country can have a great effect on the possible benefits that can be derived from modern computer technology. A case in point is the dilemma faced by the Soviet Union. They cannot move into the modern computer age while maintaining their current rigid controls on the flow of information within the USSR. This dilemma is made especially clear when one considers the consequences of millions of personal computers distributed throughout the Soviet Union. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Mar 85 21:43:57 pst From: allegra!princeton!down!daemon@Berkeley PROGRAM FOR MEETING OF SOCIETY FOR PHILOSOPHY AND PSYCHOLOGY University of Toronto, Wednesday May 15 - Saturday May 18, 1985 For copy of symposium abstracts and more information about the program [note that there may still be room for some discussants or speakers], the usenet address for the Program Chairman, Stevan Harnad, is: bellcore!princeton!mind!srh or write to: Stevan Harnad, Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 20 Nassau Street, Suite 240, Princeton NJ 08540 For information about local arrangements, write to: David Olson, McLuhan Center, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, CANADA For information about the Society and attendance, write to: Owen Flanagan, Secretary/Treasurer, Society for Philosophy & Psychology, Philosophy Department, Wellesley College, Wellesley, MA 02181 Program follows [participant lists are in several cases only partial; other contributors will also be on the program]: Workshop (2 full sessions) Ia & Ib. Artificial Intelligence Versus Neural Modeling in Psychological Theory Participants include: P. & P. Churchland, P.C. Dodwell, J. Feldman, A. Goldman, S. Grossberg, S.J. Hanson, A. Newell, A. Pellionisz, R. Schank. Symposia (10) II. Category Formation Participants include: S. Harnad, R. Jackendoff, N. Macmillan, C. Mervis, R. Millikan, R. Schank. III. Unconscious Processing Participants include: T. Carr, A. Marcel, P. Merikle. IV. Memory and Consciousness Participants include: K. Bowers, M. Moscovitch, D. Schacter, A. Marcel, R. Lockhart, E. Tulving. V. New Directions in Evolutionary Theory Participants include: A. Rosenberg, M. Ruse, E. Sober. VI. Paradoxical Neurological Syndromes Participants include: M. Gazzaniga, A. Kertesz, A. Marcel. VII. The Empirical Status of Psychoanalytic Theory Participants include: M. Eagle, E. Erwin, A. Grunbaum, J. Masling, B. von Eckardt. VIII. The Scientific Status of Parapsychological Research Participants include: J. Alcock, C. Honorton, R.L. Morris, M. Truzzi. IX. The Reality of the "G" (General) Factor in the Measurement and Modeling of Intelligence Participants include: A. Jensen, W. Rozeboom. X. The Ascription of Knowledge States to Children: Seeing, Believing and Knowing Participants include: D. Olson & J. Astington, J. Perner & H. Wimmer, M. Taylor & J. Flavell, F. Dretske, S. Kuczaj. XI. Psychology, Pictures and Drawing Participants include: J. Caron-Prague, S. Dennis, J. Kennedy, D. Pariser, S. Wilcox, J. Willats, S. Brison Contributed Paper Sessions (4): XII. Perception and Cognition XIII. Induction and Information XIV. Evolution of Cognitive and Social Structures XV. Inferences About the Mind ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #14 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-04-10 20:54:31 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Wednesday, 10 Apr 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 14 Today's Topics: Queries - Knowledge Exploration & Information on FILENET, Response to Query - Information on FILENET, Computers and People - Digital Utility Centers & The Home Computer ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 4 Apr 1985 1030-EST From: Amsel-Sdsc@CECOM-1.ARPA Subject: Knowledge Exploration KNOWLEDGE EXPLORATION DOD Computer Scientist conducting a study of information flow which will culminate in an analysis of the Knowledge - Information processing involved in a large hi-tech research and development environment. Request assistance and dicussion on any of the following topics: 1. Definition of knowledge. 2. What constitutes knowledge? (How to identify it) 3. Relationship of data, information and knowledge. 4. How does one collect or engineer knowledge? (Collection mechanism) 5. Mathematical representation of knowledge. (Formula with rationale) 6. Software and Hardware relationships to knowledge. 7. How to represent knowledge? (ex: What form or which computer language) 8. Difference between knowledge engineer and knowledge scientist. 9. Methods of controlling knowledge. 10. Who should have access to knowledge within an organization? 11. Relationship of networking to knowledge. 12. Fifth generation concept of knowledge. 13. General comments on knowledge. Charles E. Woodall (SNAIL MAIL) BOQ Box 122 Ft. Monmouth, NJ 07703 Office: (201)544-3294 Home: (201)389-3598 (ARPA/MILNet) [woodall]:AMSEL-SDSC at CECOM-1.ARP ------------------------------ Date: 8-Apr-85 14:21 PST From: William Daul - Augmentation Systems - McDnD From: Subject: Request for information on FILENET To: info-nets%mit-oz@mit-mc.arpa Has anyone heard of this? Can you send me either information or an address/phone number? What is FILENET? Thanks, --Bi// ------------------------------ From: DonWinter.pasa@Xerox.ARPA Date: 9 Apr 85 15:57:09 PST Subject: Re: Request for information on FILENET To: William Daul - Augmentation Systems - McDnD Cc: info-nets%mit-oz@mit-mc.ARPA FILENET is a microfilm replacement system based on scanners and optical disks. They are based in Orange County, CA (Costa Mesa?), and include Jack Shemer and Doug Stewart, former Xerox employees, as principals. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Apr 85 8:06:00 EST From: Stephen Wolff Subject: Digital Utility Centers (HND:8#13) The credibility of the quoted "Compute!" article, already severely strained by the stench of its Sunday-supplement, gee-whiz style, its "Experts predict..." cop-out as well as copious other journalistic ugliness, finally snaps with "..very-high-speed satellite channels that support two-way instantaneous transmission of voices,...." No prophet. No visionary. Just another hack, paid by the word, with a deadline to meet. Technical nincompoopery. I suppose I'm happy with the notion that the folk who believe trash like this are the natural and legitimate prey of those who peddle it. While I might argue about the regulation of physically addictive drugs, there's no question that anyone who wants this kind of mind- numbing intellectual dope should be allowed to buy it. ------------------------------ Date: Wed 3 Apr 85 17:14:08-PST From: WYLAND@SRI-KL.ARPA Subject: The Home Computer This was generated in response to Wayne McGuire's comments on Digital Utility Centers. (HUMAN-NETS V8 #13, Wed 20 Mar 85) The home computer market may, indeed, go the way of the video game market bust. The primary problem is that nobody needs one: There is no pressing problem in the home for which a home computer is - at present - the solution. There may be a market for (computer based) device which can automatically scan and analyze news and magazine copy to reduce the amount of time the average person spends trying to keep up with and understand events. The counter argument is that the home computer may become the new typewriter: a business machine that is cheap enough (assumed) and useful enough to be a common home item. THE PERSONAL BUSINESS COMPUTER VERSUS THE HOME COMPUTER The personal computer is great for work, not home. At work, the personal computer fills real, commonly encountered business needs. Word processing allows you to write and easily revise lengthy reports and specifications - without having to retype it every time. Spreadsheet processing allows you to easily handle most commonly encountered numerical problems such as cost estimates, financial analyses, and financial projections - without having to resort to the calculator and the columnar accounting pad. Word processing and spreadsheets are probably the real business applications that justify purchasing the personal computer as a productivity improvement tool: Word processing and spreadsheet processing probably account for 80-90% of actual personal computer use. (My opinion, based on observation of actual personal computer use by technical and non-technical types, as a percentage of hours of time the user spends at the keyboard while these programs run.) The remaining applications tend to be "gravy" or special cases. Unless you have your business at home - including being a writer, an accountant, a full time/heavy duty investor, or a programmer, etc. - there is no home application to justify a $1000-3000 personal computer. For example: * Video games are available much cheaper and better from Atari. * Recipes are better filed on index cards. * A calculator is probably better for your once-a-year tax return. * Your Christmas card list is not THAT big. * A note pad works just fine for a shopping list * A calculator is better for balancing your checkbook In general, you can't use the capabilities of the computer - word processing, spreadsheets, database management, etc. - heavily enough to justify laying out an amount of money equivalent to a used car or two weeks in Tahiti. There are two exceptions: students and fun. College students and high school students intending on college have to crank out a lot of reports and papers. The word processing capability of the personal computer can usually justify its purchase for this use: the price of the personal computer system is a small percentage of the cost of four years of college, and if it improves the student's performance, it is potentially a good investiment. The other reason for buying a personal computer is fun (and image). This is the fad market. Spending thousands of dollars on a stereo system, a car, a boat, etc., is common. These items are bought because they are enjoyed: the payback in enjoyment justifies the investiment. In this case, a personal computer is a much less expensive hobby than a ski boat or a sports car, for example. If you enjoy playing with a computer, you don't need any other reason for purchasing one. However, the fad market is volatile: we have seen a boom-and-bust cycle in video games. Unless there is a real application in the home to provide a stable market base, the home portion of the personal computer market can go through the same cycle. The business portion of the market does not have this problem: business word processing and spreadsheets are real applications. We, the net users and believers in computers, have a solution, the personal computer, looking for a problem - in the home. Making the system more elegant, user friendly, having more and better I/O devices (VCR's, modems to bulletin boards, etc.) gives you a better solution, but not the definition of the problem that needs the solution. Adding features to a product will not help you if you do not have a customer with a problem to solve. THE HOME COMPUTER: WHAT IS IT GOOD FOR? All right, IS there a home computer application? Well, maybe. The question to be answered is of the form, "is there any task in the home which can benefit from information processing and which is currently significant in time and effort, measured in hours per week?" Only one opportunity comes to mind: the news. We spend a significant amount of time on the news: watching it on TV, reading the paper, and reading magazines, both general and special interest. It would be nice to have a programmable news analyzer: a machine that would read the UPI, etc. reports on the news and select those of interest based on an algorithm *I* define - and change. It would also go back into background files and put together a report to back up the story if the defined interest level were high enough, etc. I would pay some money for such a box which to allows me to gain an active control over the flood of data that bombards me daily. Part of the reason I subscribe to magazines is because they provide these data preselection and background fill functions. How much better it would be if I could interactively tailor these functions rather than settle for what the magazine gives me this month. This is a real problem in the home which can be solved by something that looks a lot like a personal computer. Not that there aren't problems yet to be solved: the box requires the solution of an artificial intellegence type of problem of the same class as literature searches, a tough problem with no simple, universal solution as yet. Wait until next year. THE COUNTER ARGUMENT Predictions of the demise of the home computer market may be premature. It is clear that the business market is not going to go away; likewise, the student market will remain also. Perhaps the personal computer is the new typewriter: essentially a business tool that is common in the home because of its accepted utility. It, like the typewriter, is accepted as the obvious tool if you have any reasonably serious writing to do. When the price of a PC with disks and printer is approximately the same as a conventional electric typewriter (Two years? Three?) the home market may be defined by default. The final home computer may be your friendly portable TV, the prototype "electronic utility center." You can already buy a portable typewriter with the RS-232 port built-in for $229 (Brother AS-44 at Montgomery Ward). All that is needed is for JVC or Panasonic, etc. to come out with a portable TV/AM-FM/tape deck/CD player/VCR/PC compatible computer with a built-in floppy pair, a detachable keyboard, a printer/modem jack, and WordStar and Lotus in ROM - and available at your local K-Mart for $399! ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #16 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-05-16 01:20:20 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Thursday, 16 May 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 16 Today's Topics: Query - Amer. Soc. for Information Science, Responses to Queries - Assoc. of Electronic Villagers & Home Computer Usage, Computers and the Law - Privacy Law, Computers and People - Followup on Working at Home & Computers are everywhere these days... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 29-Apr-85 12:13 PDT From: William Daul - Augmentation Systems - McDnD From: Subject: RFI on American Society for Information Science (Asis) Do any of you belong to ASIS? What can you tell me about them? Does anyone out there have a phone number for them? Thanks, --Bi// ------------------------------ Date: Mon 29 Apr 85 20:51:40-EDT From: Thomas.Finholt@CMU-CS-C.ARPA Subject: Telecommuting info To: tg0u%CMU-CC-TB@CMU-CC-TE Please address all inquiries to Terri Griffith. Thanks. ----------------- About the Association of Electronic Cottagers: It apparently was formed to "inform members about regulatory challenges and to act as a voice for people working at home as telecommuters or entrepreneurs." (Telecommuting Review: The Gordon Report, V.1,3. 50 West Palm St., Altadena, CA 91001). It was founded by Paul and Sarah Edwards (818) 355-0800. Other reported groups who are interested in the regulation of home based work are the National Alliance of Homebased Businesswomen (201) 423-9131, and the National Association for Cottage Industry (312) 472-8116. Terri L. Griffith (TG0U@CMU-CC-TB) Graduate School of Industrial Administration Carnegie-Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Apr 85 09:24:37 PDT From: Richard Foy To: saffo@su-score Subject: Home Computer Ussage I purchased a TI-99/4A home computer shortly before they folded. However I have used it extensively and if they hadn't folded I am sure that I would be using it or its successors for more applications. Both Atari and Commodore are coming out with much more capable machines at home computer prices. I suspect that if the manufacturers have learned the lessons of that last round and don't try to drive each other out of business they will find a steady growth in the market. The things that I have used it for so far include: 1 phone address list 2 engagement calendar 3 birthdate reminder 4 creating brief abstracts of magazines and books that I read and might want to reference later 5 writing letters to my representatives 6 organizing and preparing outlines for talks that I give at various groups 7 personalized program with spoken words and music and sprites to lead me through yoga type excercises many of the above applications are slow to be usefull if written in basic I have had to write them in assembly so that I can look up a phone number in less time than it would take in my typical writ by hand phone book If TI were still in the mome computer business I would also be using it to water my plants on a water requirement basis rather than a simple time schedule that most water systems use. That would probably pay for the cost of the interface card in less than one year because I am sure that I significantly oveer water with the timer in order to insure that plants are not lost by drying out. When there is enough competition so that banks charge less for computer that the banking feedback is suffient for IRS purposes etc. Some more current applications which I have but which require assembly language to be usefull. 8. A file of my dreams which I discuss in dream interpretation groups. 9. A file of events reagrding other people that I work or associate with in one way or another to improve my ability of relating to them in that I can refresh my memory about thier response to various situations I suspect that other people would find many similiar uses when the coming generation of home computers stabilizes and has had time for user group assembly language or compiled ie fast running programs to become available. My thoughts include: 1. Files of sports statistics that can be manipulated to predict games. 2. Horse racing data and prediction programs. 3. Home enviormental control. 4. Home lighting control. 5. Water heater time temperature control. I would have the control applications now except for TI's demise. I ould like to receive your list of results to your study. richard foy foy@aerospace.arpa ------------------------------ Date: 15 May 85 16:01:08 PDT (Wednesday) From: Hoffman.ES@Xerox.ARPA Subject: Privacy Law and the Computer To: Info-Law@SRI-CSL.ARPA Excerpted from the Los Angeles Times, May 14, 1985, Part I, page 1: Computer Age Gaps Privacy Law: Race to Pace Technology By William C. Rempel Federal laws prohibit interception of private mail, eavesdropping on private telephone conversations and search of private property without a warrant. However, federal authorities in Detroit tried to seize computer mail, police in Rhode Island used FM radios to eavesdrop on cordless telephone conversations, and Army investigators at the Pentagon opened and examined the personal computer files of government employees. None of these investigators had a warrant, nor did they violate any law. Technology...has created an array of loopholes in the laws of privacy. Concern about the loopholes has prompted a California assemblywoman to introduce bills that could make California the first state to extend privacy protection to all electronic communications; Congress has directed its Office of Technology Assessment to investigate technology's effect on civil liberties, and several members of the House and Senate are proposing legislation that would adapt provisions in the Bill of Rights to the computer age. .... "Ways may someday be developed by which government, without removing papers from secret drawers, can reproduce them in court, and by which it will be enabled to expose to a jury the most intimate occurrences of the home," [former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis] wrote. ....[discussion of concealed television cameras and cordless telephone conversation interception].... [F]ederal wiretap statutes refer specifically to the "aural acquisition" of information during a "wire" transmission over government-regulated telephone systems. .... Rand Corp. executive Willis H. Ware, appointed to the Privacy Protection Study Commission after Congress passed the Privacy Act of 1974, said that data transmissions have almost no protection from private interception. .... "Anyone having access to such a body of information might as well have the key to the office and to its file cabinets," he earlier told a House hearing. It's all but impossible to know whether data has been intercepted. A computer snoop can read and make copies of information without leaving any electronic fingerprints. .... Peter Keane, an assistant public defender [in San Francisco] said, "There's no longer a need for someone to break into an office at 3 a.m. -- doing a `black bag job' like in the Watergate (burglary). Now the burglar can sit in the safety and convenience of his own office, using his hot little fingers to punch out the proper access codes." .... [I]nvestigators [in a San Francisco case] found that a police officer had been using the government's computer to keep some records for his wife's church charity. Contributing to the legal confusion over access to computer data is the largely unresolved question of who owns the information in a computer. It is similar to the question of who owns the contents of an employee's locked desk drawer, the employee or the boss? The Army has taken the position that the contents of its computer belong to the Army.... Larry Layten, a civilian computer expert with the Army's Materiel Development and Readiness Command, published his concerns about such investigations in a message he sent out over a national electronic mail system. [This was in Human-Nets, Volume 6, Issue 64, 21 Oct. 1983. -- Rodney Hoffman] "If, in fact, the owner of a computer system has the right to search (in witch hunt fashion) through all the files...then I...will refrain from using the system as I have in the past: as a note pad, telephone replacement, sounding board for ideas, etc.," Layten said. .... [discussion of attempted government seizure of electronic mail archives in a drug case, and the proposed California constitutional amendment].... ------------------------------ Date: 14 May 85 19:32:52 EDT From: Mike Subject: Followup on computers and working at home This topic was discussed a while back on Human-Nets. Now, looking at the May 1985 issue of Micro Communications, I find a one page article about this very topic. The article quotes Dennis Chamot, assistant director of the AFL-CIO's Department of Professional Employees. He points out that "when the AFL-CIO calls for a ban on home work under the FLSA, the act includes exemptions for executive, managerial, and professional employees. The exemption is total for the first two classes, and there are salary tests for high-paid professional employees. Most computer programmers and analysts fall into the exempt groups." (Quote from article, but not a direct quote of Mr. Chamot.) So, it may be that the AFL-CIO is not really causing trouble here. However, this still does not protect us from stupid legislators who can't tell a cash register from a computer terminal, but who will still pass laws about home labor. -- "The Model Citizen" Mike^Z Zaleski@Rutgers [ allegra, ihnp4 ] pegasus!mzal ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Apr 85 10:31:24 CDT From: Will Martin -- AMXAL-RI Subject: Computers are everywhere these days... Thought you all might find this item interesting, from the April '85 (no, I don't think it's an April Fool's joke) issue of SPORTS MERCHANDISER (a sporting goods trade paper), new products listing, page 69: COMPUTER REEL Miya Epoch has added the Electronic Computer controlled fishing reel to its line. ME-1000 C-11 combines a two-speed motor-driven reel with an electronic computer. The fisherman can punch in the desired fishing depth, jigging cycle, jigging space, and jigging timer and the computer memorizes the program and will repeat it until changed. The 12-volt DC battery-operated motor winds at 280 or 330 rpm, automatically changing speeds according to the load, and can be programmed to stop winding when the fish is beside the boat. Suggested retail $1,895. [sic] Miya Epoch, 1635 Crenshaw Blvd., Torrance, CA 90501 ***End of item*** There is a picture of this sort of bulky-looking reel with no handles showing (I think they're folded) with a panel on the back with chiclet-style keys but no readily-visible readout (though there might be one -- not much detail on a 5-cm-sq picture). It looks like a real thing... I know fishing is supposed to be for relaxation, but this seems a bit much... Will Martin ARPA/MILNET: wmartin@almsa-1.ARPA USENET: seismo!brl-bmd!wmartin ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #17 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-05-16 21:53:09 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Friday, 17 May 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 17 Today's Topics: Computers and People - An Electronic Communications wish list ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 15 May 1985 13:10-EDT From: Nathaniel.Borenstein@CMU-CS-ZOG.ARPA Subject: LONG Communications wish list ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS: A WISH LIST Nathaniel S. Borenstein Jonathan Rosenberg Information Technology Center Carnegie-Mellon University Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213 This document describes everything we would like to see in an electronic communication system. While we are making such a list as the first step toward building such a system, the list should not be read as a description of what we will ultimately build; rather, it is an attempt to define the ideal system, of which we hope our actual system will ultimately be a reasonable approximation. In trying to define this ideal system, we are asking the help of anyone with an interest in electronic communication. We want to make our wish list as complete as possible, so that we can begin our actual design with a very broad idea of what electronic communication makes possible. All suggestions for items not on this list would be gratefully appreciated. They may be sent via netmail to nsb@cmu-cs-zog.arpa. (ITC members can send internal mail.) Although netmail responses are preferred, you may also send us mail at the physical address above. We thank you in advance for your assistance; we anticipate that the volume of response will be too large to permit individual acknowledgements. THE BIG PICTURE We imagine a system in which mail, mailing lists, bulletin boards, news groups, and events calendars are integrated into a unified framework. Users should have the option of treating bulletin boards and similar forms of communication as either identical or separate from individual mail. We want to represent messages in a common logical database; that is, it will appear to the user as if there is a single database of messages, including his own mail and any other forums of communication to which he has access privileges. Whether or not private mail should actually be stored as part of the large database is an open question. RELIABLE DELIVERY Reliable delivery is absolutely essential in an electronic communication system; ideally, everything should be delivered as requested. Barring that, the user should always be notified of any delivery problems. FAST DELIVERY Delivery should be fast; users should be able to quickly verify that messages have been delivered to their destinations. AUTHENTICATED DELIVERY Delivery should be secure; authentication mechanisms should assure accurate naming of the user sending the message (assuming, of course, that the normal login procedures have been effective in establishing a user's identity). For mail sent beyond the local network, a special header set should be provided to help track the mail (e.g. to document where the mail originated and how the original destination address was specified.) Sufficient information to facilitate replies from remote sites should also be provided. SIMPLE DELIVERY Delivery should be simple from the user's end; in a multi-machine environment, it should be necessary only to know a user's name to have the mail delivered to the correct machine. ROBUST DELIVERY Delivery should be robust; when machines are not working, the system should reroute mail around them or hold mail until they are working. The system should be easily told by an individual to forward his mail to a certain address, when his "home" machine changes. EFFICIENT DELIVERY The system should support efficient delivery of mail to large groups of users. In particular, it should be possible even to send mail to every user of the system without overloading the file system or the network. VOLUME AND PERFORMANCE MONITORING The system should be heavily instrumented to monitor mail volume and traffic patterns, and to supply data about performance of the system at different times of day and under other variations of the environment (e.g. network load). THE COMMUNICATIONS DATABASE All Communications should be stored as a database of messages, with appropriate mechanisms for protection and access, in such a way as to support extremely general schemes for classifying and relating messages. It should support the efficient extraction of salient features of messages, such as the sender's name or various classification features, without requiring expensive parsing while the user waits. Basically, the database must be designed with the rest of this wish list in mind. MULTI-DIMENSIONAL MESSAGES It should be possible to link messages together to create multi-dimensional communication. For example, a message read by a large number of users may generate a large number of responses, which are of interest only to those who were interested in the original message. Replies to messages should be made available on a "want-to-know" basis. Reply messages may continue a discussion stimulated by the original message, or may simply comment on (annotate) the message itself. Such annotations might be made publicly (as part of a public message forum) or privately, for an individual's future reference. It should also be able to relate two messages that are not replies to each other by specifying "See-also" links between them. CLASSIFICATION OF MESSAGES Messages should be classifiable by any number of attributes. For example, a classification "Emacs" might apply to any messages dealing with the Emacs editor. The set of messages so classified could thus be viewed as a more conventional electronic bulletin board on the subject of Emacs, but would be far more flexible. Inappropriately classified messages could be reclassified, and messages could efficiently appear in multiple classifications. The names of message classifications should not be case sensitive. Associated with each classification should be a "permanent" message, explaining the purpose of the classification, who it is intended for, why it was created, and so on. REVIEWS OF MESSAGES: MANAGEMENT OF INFORMATION FLOOD A common problem with electronic communication systems like UNIX netnews is information flood. This is the phenomenon whereby the sheer volume of information discourages most users from reading any of it. In our ideal system, this problem would be rendered more manageable by reviews of messages. For any given topic, there are always some people who are strongly enough interested to read a large volume of material. Any such individual should be able to declare himself a reviewer, and to indicate, for each message he sees, whether or not the message is worth reading. Other users would then be able to specify any logical function of reviewers' opinions as a filter on the set of messages they might be shown. Users would be able to say, for example, "show me all the messages about Emacs that James Gosling thought were worth reading," or "show me all the jokes from net.jokes that either Lily Tomlin or Bill Cosby read and thought were funny but that Bob Hope didn't like." Reviewers' opinions might also be consulted in deciding whether or not a notice belonged in a certain classification. MANNER OF CLASSIFICATION Messages can be classified in several fashions. First of all, the sender of the message can specify how it should be classified, e.g. "this message is of general interest" or "this message is for the 'emacs' classification". Second, certain classifications may be defined to automatically classify messages by key words, senders, or destinations (e.g. mailing lists from the outside world). Third, mechanisms could allow after-the-fact reclassification of messages. Certain individuals could be authorized to add or remove messages from particular classifications, while system administrators might be given such privileges for all classifications. Voting mechanisms might allow the community as a whole to change classifications, and the use of the reviewer mechanism in this context has already been mentioned. It should be a simple matter to create new classifications; any user should be able to create a classification and tell the world that it represents a discussion group on a certain topic. The creator of a classification should be able to specify certain parameters, e.g. who can and can't view messages in the classification, but these specifications should be subject to simple revision by the system administrators. If it is possible for any user to create new classifications, it must also be possible to merge classifications that should never have been separate. This should certainly be within the power of the system administrators; it might also be made possible to merge two classifications if some person or group of people with dictatorial powers over each of the classifications agree to do so, but the mechanisms for verifying this agreement could prove difficult to implement without being cumbersome. FLEXIBLE APPEARANCE TIMING: EVENTS CALENDARS It should be possible to send notices to the community regarding an event in the future, with the timing of the notice geared to the event rather than the time of posting. That is, it should be possible to announce an event for May 14, and to have the notice appear to the users keyed to that date; users could then choose to see notices that pertained to any time up to a certain date, in order to preview events in a coming interval. What this suggests is a blurring of the line between mail or bulletin board notices and event scheduling (calendar) programs or reminder services. At the database level, at least, no such distinction needs to exist; the user should have the option of viewing the scheduling calendar as part of or separate from the larger database of communications. In addition to making it possible to integrate events calendars into the larger communications database, it should also be possible to access such calendars in several other ways. For example, it should be a simple manner to extract a simple, one-page schedule of the week's event in a reasonable layout for posting on a physical bulletin board. Similarly, the front end to the system should be highly flexible; the dates for which events are scheduled should be specifiable in a very broad input language. CONNECTIONS TO THE OUTSIDE A system such as the one wished for here would inevitably have many incompatibilities with the communication systems in outside networks, such as ARPAnet and usenet. Therefore it is essential that a clean gateway be constructed. This gateway should take externally generated communications -- mail, ARPAnet mailing lists, UNIX netnews, and the like -- and convert them to our internal format (store them in our database). For outgoing communications, it should remove local dependencies and warn local users about features that will not work with mail sent to the outside. SECURITY OF COMMUNICATIONS It is desirable to be able to make messages private or public in varying degrees. Some messages should be unreadable by anyone but the recipient, some should be readable by everyone, and some should be readable by all members of a particular project or group of friends. Anonymous messages are a thorny issue in most systems; aside from the fact that it is nearly always possible to beat a system and send messages anonymously, it should be realized that it is sometimes desirable and reasonable to do so -- for purposes of harmless jokes, for example, or for discussions about AIDS. We suspect that facilitating harmless anonymous mail may discourage attempts to break the system, and hence decrease the likelihood of harmful anonymous mail. The mechanism we propose is pseudonyms. It should be possible to send mail pseudonymously -- that is, with the sender's true name known and preserved by the system, but not shown to the intended recipients. Since the name is actually preserved, it will be possible to trace malicious or threatening mail, and this possibility should help to discourage such mail. Meanwhile, the pseudonym facility should facilitate frank discussions of private topics in public forums. The system could even provide the possibility of two people, communicating under pseudonyms, deciding to mutually reveal themselves -- that is, to make their identities known to each other but no one else. Essential to the scheme is the idea that mail can be sent to the pseudonymous author of a message without the sender ever knowing that person's real identity. EDITING AND DELETING NOTICES It should be a simple matter to edit or delete a notice existing in a public place. The author of a notice should always have the right to edit or delete it. These rights should also be selectively grantable to appropriate individuals; for example, one might desire to give library staff members the right to edit notices classified as "library policy". System maintainers will probably want the right to edit all messages, to allow them to act quickly in the event that a truly inappropriate notice (e.g. publishing credit card numbers or military secrets) appears as a public message. Reviewers (see above) may wish to edit any notice they are reviewing; their corrections should be seen automatically by people who accept their reviews, though not by others. Finally, everyone should have a method of editing a message and submitting it to the author for inspection, thus facilitating friendly suggestions for painlessly editing messages. Also desirable would be a method where editing could be performed by some kind of consensus or voting method, but the details of such a scheme are far from obvious. RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED MAIL Few people are trusting enough to believe that mail delivery systems always work correctly, and those people who are that trusting are fools. Therefore it is desirable to have confirmation when a piece of vital mail is delivered properly. However, it seems a mistake to trust entirely in automatic mechanisms for this purpose. Therefore we propose a special class of mail, "return receipt requested mail". When a user sends this kind of mail, special information should be encoded in the mail which causes the recipient's mail-reading program to notice that it is "return receipt requested". When the recipient asks to see the mail, his mail program should tell him that it will only show him the mail if he agrees that is is OK to tell the sender he has read it; in effect, he will have to "sign for it" -- he will have to acknowledge its receipt. This acknowledgment will cause another coded message to be returned to the original sender, stating that the mail was received by a human on the other end. Meanwhile, the sender's mail system should keep track of all unacknowledged mail of this type, and warn the sender of such mail when an overly long interval has passed without acknowledgement. (The length of this interval should probably be customizable.) PARCEL POST A very common way for mail systems to be used, though they were not designed for this purpose, is to transmit files. Many mail messages consist of a line like "Here is the program you wanted:" followed by the contents of a file. The recipient typically has to write the contents of the message into a file and then edit it to remove the extra, mail-related information at the top (and sometimes even the bottom). "Parcel post" mail, however, could streamline this process. Files could be shipped via the mail system, with state information encoding the fact that that the mail is actually a file, with a certain default name. When a user receives such mail, and asks to read it, the system should instead tell him: "This is parcel post mail; is it OK to write it out as file x?" Of course, the system should warn about any possible conflict of file names, and it might also be desirable to make it impossible to write out files which are directly executable or which have certain critical names (e.g. ".cshrc"). Another method for passing files around via mail might be to encode references to files as part of messages. When a message is viewed, this information could cause the mail system to ask "Do you want to see file x?" and to offer a menu of actions regarding that file. This offers the advantage of not transmitting long files as mail, but simply transmitting pointers to the files instead. Of course, the files would need to be added on to the messages when they left the local network, in order for non-local users to receive all of the related information. VARYING INTERFACE STYLES Experience with past bulletin board and mail systems strongly suggests that there is no "right" user interface for such systems. For a given such application, there are usually a few distinct styles of interaction, and a group of users that prefer each interaction style. In order to provide users with the option of multiple interaction styles, most systems have ultimately duplicated large amounts of program, data, or both. In an ideal system, everything not related to the user interface itself should be provided via a common set of publicly available subroutines. This should make it much easier and more efficient to build several styles of interaction, and hence more likely that the world of possible interaction styles is more fully explored and implemented. TRANSMISSION OF SPECIALIZED FILES The system should support the transmission of specially-formatted files as mail messages, even those in non-standard (e.g. non-ASCII) format. Most particularly, in the ITC, the system should properly transmit base editor files. This will allow messages to include complicated pictures, and perhaps even, eventually, to make the candles flicker on the birthday cake that is drawn on the screen. USEFUL HELP SYSTEM Any system that fulfills even a fraction of the wishes on this list will be extremely complicated, at least with regard to the advanced features. Top-quality documentation, and a help system that simplifies access to that documentation on-line, should be provided. SEARCH FACILITIES Mechanisms should be provided to facilitate search through the database for messages matching a particular specification, e.g. messages from Ronald Reagan pertaining to the Strategic Defense Initiative. Such features will obviously be highly database-intensive, and should certainly be among those features that do not need to be rewritten each time a new user interface is designed. PURGING AND ARCHIVING A database of the size discussed here is likely to grow at the rate of many megabytes daily. Obviously, not all messages can be kept on-line forever. The system should be designed to regularly purge and archive old notices; these notices should be backed up to a long-term storage medium such as magnetic tape, and hence be available when they are really needed. Purging intervals -- that is, the amount of time a message is preserved before archival -- should be specifiable for each classification, with a global default (probably something like two months). A message should be purged when it is older than the purging interval for all of its classifications. MAILING LISTS The system should support the compilation and use of mailing lists, for sending private mail to particular groups of people. It should also be possible to send mail in reply to all messages matching a certain specification, e.g. all messages in a certain class, or all new messages except the one from Jim Morris. OTHER STUFF ??? The list above, though long, is undoubtedly incomplete. We would like to have as complete a wish list as possible before we become too heavily involved in the details of the design of a new system, which will include as many of the wishes as possible. We will be very grateful for all comments and suggestions to improve this wish list. Once again, we can not individually acknowledge all replies, but will nonetheless be grateful for them. Please send all comments to the net address or physical address given at the beginning of this document. Thank you for your assistance. ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #18 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-06-08 00:05:22 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Friday, 7 Jun 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 18 Today's Topics: Query - request for assistance, Response to Query - ASIS, Computers and the Law - Privacy Law, Computers and People - The Electronic Wish List (2 msgs) & Paper vs. CD Books (2 msgs) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 20 May 1985 0736-EDT From: Amsel-Sdsc@CECOM-1.ARPA Subject: request for assistance... Greetings, An unusual request for the human-nets... I am an electronics engineer working in the support environment of military Battlefield Automated Systems (BASs). My request is such... Does anyone have or know of software availability for a 16 bit Sperry Microcomputer running under CPM-UTS 30 (CPM+). This is to be used in an area surrounding hospital applications. Any and all help this area would be appreciated. Please respond to: Snail Mail: Ed Keezer Software Development & Suppo Center ATTN: AMSEL-SDSC-SC-T Building 1210 Fort Monmouth, NJ 07703 Phone: (201) 532-1674 (commeal) 992-1674 (autovon) MILNET: [KEEZER]:AMSEL-SDSC at CECOM-1 Many Thanks... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 May 85 12:24:13 cdt From: Don Kraft Subject: ASIS Response Cc: WBD.TYM@office-2.csnet In answer to the request for information about the American Society for Information Science (ASIS), as a longstanding member and as the editor for the Journal of the American Society for Information Science (JASIS), I am happy to be able to respond. I hope that you will be able to put this out on the net so others may see it. ASIS is the professional society for those working in the area of information science, which is certainly an interdisciplinary field. They publish a handbook and directory, a bi-monthly bul- letin, a monthly newsletter, and, of course, the journal. They hold two meetings annually, and have a variety of special interest groups (e.g., language processing, office of the future, computer- ized retrieval, foundations of information science, international information issues, library automation and networks, management, medical information, law and information technology, numeric data- bases, storage and retrieval technology, and user online interac- tion, to mention just a few). They also have local chapters in several cities, and many college campuses have student chapters. I have an address (1010 Sixteenth Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20036) and a telephone number ( (202) 659-3644 ) for ASIS. More- over, anyone who cares to write to me, or to the society itself, can get a brochure describing the society and an application form. Moreover, organizations may wish to consider an institutional membership. Potential authors of research articles should consider submitting articles on your work to me for consideration for publication in JASIS. I have enclosed a copy of the "Scope of JASIS" which should show you the breadth of coverage of the journal. Thank you for your consideration and interest in ASIS and JASIS. 1. Theory of Information Science 4. Applied Information Science Foundations of Information Science Informations systems design -- Information theory tools, principles, applications Bibliometrics Case histories Information retrieval -- Information system operations models and principles Standards Evaluation and measurement Information technology -- hardware Representation, organization, and and software classification of information Automation of information systems Artificial intelligence and natural Online retrieval systems language processing Office automation and records management 2. Communication 5. Social and Legal Aspects of Information Theory of communication Non-print media Impact of information systems and Man-machine interaction technology upon society Network design, operation, and Ethics and information management Legislative and regulatory aspects Models and empirical findings about History of information science information transfer Information science education User and usage studies International issues 3. Management, Economics, and Marketing Economics of information Management of information systems Models of information management decisions Marketing and market research studies Special clientele -- arts and humanities, behavioral and social sciences, biological and chemical sciences, energy and environment, legal, medical, and education. Authors may also send in brief communications, scholarly opinion pieces, and even letters to the editor. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 May 85 10:30:10 EDT From: Brint Cooper To: Hoffman.ES@XEROX.ARPA Cc: Info-Law@SRI-CSL.ARPA Subject: Re: Privacy Law and the Computer If you view the computer as an extension of your desk, then it appears that US Government employees may have no privacy rights except those specifically spelled out by law or regulation. So our phones may not be wiretapped because that is expressly forbidden, except for issues involving "national security." And we may not be required to give our social security number on a form unless we wish to be reimbursed for official travel expenses. And so on. At any time, it seems, the appropriate authorities can search our government desks, file cabinets, and offices. So, then, why not our computer files? Brint ARPA: abc@brl.arpa UUCP: ...{decvax,cbosgd}!brl-bmd!abc Dr Brinton Cooper U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory Attn: AMXBR-SECAD (Cooper) Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5066 Offc: 301 278-6883 AV: 283-6883 FTS: 939-6883 ------------------------------ Date: 17 May 85 09:47 EDT From: (David H M Spector) Subject: RE: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #17 Hmmm. It sounds to me like the basic structure of CCITT X.400. This is the proposed international standard for message handling systems, including voice, fax, teletex, etc. Although some of the DataBase functionality that is described isn't strictly X.400, its implied in the standard that UAs (User Agents - Read: Front Ends to Mailers) may provide such services. David Spector NYU/acf Systems Group ------------------------------ Date: Friday, 17 May 1985 10:48-EDT From: sde@Mitre-Bedford Subject: Re: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #17 See PARTI on The SOURCE for a tree-structured conference/BB system. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 May 85 17:39:10 EST From: Jerry E. Pournelle Subject: paper vs. CD books To: goutal%parrot.DEC@DECWRL Your essay is insteresting but there is this: one mivht not want the encyclopedia at the beach, but one might want a medly of a buncha books on a trip. I do not believe cd rom will wipe out books for whiles and whiles, but-- according to hitachi you can manufacture a cdrom disk for under five dollars. that is high compared to a paperback, but it is low compared to a hardbound (or at least right in line). That is also early on the learning curve. I cannot believe the privce will rise (as it has for printed books) as thechnology advances. You need not putt the complete works of Niven on one disk; how about two or three of his books? And so what, the disk could have held more. You could have put more pages in a bnook, too. I dunno. I do believe the cd rom is going to make some profound changes. but then the micros are doing that anyway. pournelle ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4-Jun-85 03:11:50 PDT From: vortex!lauren@rand-unix (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: CD ROMS Cc: VIDEOTECH@SRI-CSL.ARPA Sometime ago we were arguing (excuse me, DISCUSSING) how much digital info on CD's (so-called CD ROMs) would cost. Some argued that it would be very cheap (since the disks are theoretically cheap in quantity). My suspicion was that it could tend to be fairly expensive, depending on the particular information. Well, I've found one firm already selling data on CD's. They provide Library of Congress Card Catalog info. It is available on a subscription basis only, one disk delivered quarterly. Cost is (approx.) $800/yr. (subscription is on a yearly basis only). Whether or not you consider this expensive depends on your point of view, of course. As for the RGB outputs on the newer Sony CD players--they are for the graphics CD standard. Except for one problem--the standard isn't really a standard yet--arguing is still going on. NOBODY is currently putting any graphics on the discs (except for one-of-a-kind demos) due to the current confusion about the "standard." --Lauren-- ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #19 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-06-17 20:46:34 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Monday, 17 Jun 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 19 Today's Topics: Computers and People - Re: Mail System Specs ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 30-May-85 06:32 PDT From: David Potter - McDonnell Douglas/AUGMENT Div. From: Subject: Mail System Specs To: nsb@cmu-cs-zog.arpa Comment: Re your recent "LONG Communications wish list," this is a generalized specification for an electronic mail system which we developed for internal use. Not Company Confidential, though, and I thought both you and the Net might find it of interest. Also, please feel free to forward my previous reply to Human-Nets -- I neglected to do so myself. -- David GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR A COMPLETE ELECTRONIC MESSAGE SYSTEM An Electronic Message System should: * accept input from a wide range of terminals * be easy to use, easy to learn, with logical and consistent commands * handle short memos to very large documents equally well * distribute and receive messages within its host computer, between other such hosts, across networks, and between other message systems * optionally, be integrated in a consistent manner with capabilities provided by a comprehensive office information system * provide features that aid the organization, archiving, and retrieval of messages to support personal and organizational needs * provide privacy and secure, long term storage of messages * provide online help in addition to online and hardcopy documentation * operate on reliable, cost effective hardware and be connected to one or more nationwide/worldwide computer networks * be able to handle millions of messages and many thousands of users and user addresses as needed SPECIFIC FEATURES OF A COMPLETE ELECTRONIC MESSAGE SYSTEM Terminal The message system must be easily usable by users with printing terminals as well as those with display terminals. Full duplex ASCII terminals must be supported. User Interface Basic functions should be prompt-driven. Additional functions should be English command-driven, with menu command selections optional. Composing or Drafting Messages Users should be prompted for required fields, such as: To: Cc: Subject: Message: Send?: Command mode should be available for designating optional fields, such as: Access Limited To: Acknowledgement of System Delivery Requested: Acknowledgement of User Receipt Requested: Action (specified): Addendum To: Author: Blind Cc: Comment: Delivery Timing Specifications: Rush: (immediate) Soon: (hour or less) Defer: (Overnight) Start Delivery (at date/time): Stop Delivery (at date/time if not yet delivered): Extend Access To: File Copy: From: In reply To: Keywords: Part of: References: Reply To: Route (in succession) To: Pass (to next recipient): Subcollections: Submit To Library: Editing Capabilities Editing During Entry: The following functions should be available during user text entry: Backspace character, word, text, paragraph. Retype line, paragraph Current position indication Continuous entry mode Extended Editing Capabilities: The following functions should be available for additional editing operations: Insert, Delete, Replace, Move, Copy, Transpose, Append, Break, Sort, as appropriate, on entities such as: Character, Word, Text, Visible Text Strings, Invisible Text Strings, Paragraph, Groups of Paragraphs, Section, File, and Message Ideally, the text editor would facilitate the structuring of information in hierarchical form, with commands provided for the viewing of selected portions of messages (long messages may be considered to be documents) according to their structure. Accepting Prepared Input From Stand-alone Terminals Users must be able to easily transfer pre-typed, formatted text from stand-alone terminals to the message system. Message Files One primary file should be designated for receipt of messages. In addition, other user-designated files should be available for placement of messages as part of the users' message management operations. Message Formats Message formats must be consistent with required MILNET message format protocols. This includes, at a minimum, adherence to MILNET-specified required fields and addressing protocols. Message Identifiers Message identifiers must be unique for each message. Within the identifier scheme, the number of such identifiers must be expandable to at least 1 million unique messages. Message Headers Message headers should contain at least the unique message identifier, the date the message was transmitted by the sender, and the text of the subject of the message. Message Fields -- Required and Optional Required message fields should be kept to a minimum to facilitate use for simple transmissions and use by relatively un-trained users. In addition, there should be a wide range of optional fields available to facilitate use of the message system for personal and organizational information management. Message Body The user should be able to place up to 300 disk pages of information in the message body field. The user should be able to format the message text in any manner desired, using the editing commands available in the message system or commands accessible in a more comprehensive system with which the message system may be integrated. The full text of the message should be delivered to all recipients except where limited distribution is specified by the sender. In those cases, the full text of the specified message should be available as recorded messages in the library. In such cases, only header information and other necessary fields, such as the location of the library copy of the full text, would be sent to the addressees. Message Categories User-named message categories should be able to be created by commands so that users may store messages in ways that meet their own particular needs for later retrieval and review. Message Drafts The message system should enable users to prepare drafts of messages that may be sent at a later time. These drafts of messages should be stored for future use and should be easily accessed, further edited if necessary, and sent in the normal manner. Users should be able to add or delete optional fields, edit existing text, or enter new text at any stage of the message preparation process after supplying the text for required fields. Pre-specified Message Forms The message system should provide the capability for users to prepare message forms in advance for later input to the message system. Any or all of the optional message fields should be part of such message forms and should be selectable and ordered at the user's option. Upon each user submission of a message form to the message system, the system should prompt for any fields that contain no pre-entered data and should complete the message sending process in the normal manner. Blank Entries In Fields The message system should accept blank entries in all fields other than the required fields that must contain entries. Fields omitted from the message should be considered to have been designated as blank by the sender. Message Privacy Each message should by default be private to and viewable only by the sender, the recipients of the message, and others designated by the sender. Signatures The system should facilitate the verifiable placement of "signatures" on messages and documents where appropriate. Spelling Correction The message system should provide the capability for users to check and correct the spelling of text in messages. This should be available in both interactive and "batch" modes and accessible within the message system or optionally accessible within the overall office information system if such exists. Identification System The message system should have an extensive Identification system where all relevant information about each user and his/her address is stored. This information should be accessible to the message system for verification and distribution purposes and to users to support the addressing process. Looking Up User Identifications/Addresses Users should be able to locate and view specific user information on the basis of: individual identification codes, last name, and Soundex text. Distribution Lists Users should be able to prepare their own distribution lists and submit them to the message system for use in message distribution. In addition, the identification system should provide the capability for users to designate "official" list names and associated user identifications as distribution lists. Verifying Distribution Lists The message system should verify all addresses in distribution lists (for the message system) and inform the sender of any non-valid addresses specified and the fact that those particular messages were not delivered. File Copies The message system should enable users to specify a file or files where copies of selected messages will be placed by the message system for file purposes. Message Distribution System The message system should provide a process that is continually available for the distribution of messages to their proper destination including messages addressed intra-host, cross-host, or inter-network. The distribution system should be capable of making repeated attempts to forward messages and when delivery is not possible, should notify the sender of the non-delivery. The message system should be able to re-format certain messages so as to adapt to the required formats of other approved message systems. Passing Messages Along the Approval Chain The message system should support the organizational approval process (where needed) by providing the capability for the sender to specify the succession of approving recipients. The system should facilitate subsequent approvals and the further distribution of messages along the route. The system should also permit parallel information copies of messages. Permanent Recording of Messages -- a Library The message system should provide the capability for users to send messages and longer documents to a library for permanent recording and later retrieval. User Profiles The message system should provide users with the option of setting available options relative to their particular terminal and customary use of the message system to be the default mode for their own use. These options should be changeable by users as desired. Receiving Messages Users should be notified that they have new, un-read messages upon login to the system and whenever they specifically request such information by issuing the appropriate command. Message/Header Selection Each message in each message category should be assigned, in addition to its permanent unique identifier, a temporary message number that can be easily used to select messages for reading, printing, and message management operations. Such numbers would preferably be from 1 to n in each category, depending on the order and number of messages in the category at any point in time. Users should be able to print or display only the message headers in selected message categories. Reading Messages New message headers should be presented to the user upon entry into the message system. The user should be able to select and read messages easily whenever desired. Single messages, groups of messages, or all messages in a message category should be selectable by command. Users with display terminals should be able to view one screen at a time if desired, continuing to view subsequent screens when ready. Accessing Recorded Messages Users should be able to easily locate and read messages that have been recorded in the library, after receiving notification of such messages through the normal message distribution process. Recorded messages should be viewed or copied only, but should not be able to be changed by users. Answering Messages Users should be able to answer messages by command selection of such messages and be prompted for required fields where needed identifier and addressing information is not already known to the system. The entire set of optional fields should be available for use in such replies even if not used in the original message. Users should be able to specify distribution of the answering message as being the same as the distribution of the original message, just to the sender, or to any additional addressees. Forwarding Messages Users should be able to forward messages by command selection of such messages and be prompted for required fields where needed identifier and addressing information is not already known to the system. Users should be prompted for any comments they wish to append to the forwarded message. Users should be able to specify distribution of forwarded messages to any desired addressees. Identifying Foreign-system Messages Messages received from other message systems should be assigned unique message identifiers consistent with the identifier scheme of the message system. In addition, any foreign-system message identifying information should be retained for possible use in answering and forwarding operations. Answering/Forwarding Foreign-system Messages Users should be able to answer or forward messages received from foreign message systems in the same manner that they would perform such operations on messages originating within their own message system. Such answered or forwarded messages should be distributed to selected addressees within any recognized message system, including the systems from which they originated. Printing Messages and Optional Formatting Users should be able to print single messages, groups of messages, or entire message categories on a variety of printing terminals. Messages should be formatted exactly as received or, optionally, in special user-designated formats under the control of integrated print formatting functions that may be available to the users. Message Management Users should be able to delete or move single messages, groups of messages, or entire message categories as they wish. Users should be able to undelete messages if desired unless the they have requested that the system (by command or profile setting) permanently remove them from the file. Searching for Messages Users should be able to view or print a list of category names, message headers in any category, or view or print headers or the full text messages on the basis of text strings contained in the To, Cc, From, or Subject fields. User should be able to specify single messages or groups of messages. File and Directory Management The message system must provide the user with the ability to list information about any or all files in his or her directory, viewing such file information as the times and dates of: file creation, last write, and last read, as well as file protection status and file size. Such information about other users' files shall also be available, subject to file protection features. Library Functions Users should be able to place selected messages in a central library for permanent storage with access restrictions specified by the user placing such items in the library. Each message or document entered into the library should be protected from future changes and all relevant reference information should be entered into a user-accessible catalog. Future reading of such catalogs should take into account specific file privacy protection settings on a message by message and user by user basis. Library documents should have a common default print format for uniformity in printing. Users should be able to enter additional printing format specifications as they wish prior to submission to the library. The full text of all messages and documents must be contained in the version submitted to the library. However, at the sender's option, only relevant reference information may be delivered to people listed in the addressee fields. The library should be open-ended, providing for both online disk and offline long term archival tape storage. It should be possible for various sub-units of an organization to create separate and private libraries and their corresponding catalogs as required. Searching for a Document Using the Library Catalog Users should be able to locate documents or messages filed in the library without knowing precisely where they are filed. Users should be able to search through the library catalog(s) on the basis of several different criteria or Boolean combinations thereof: Message subject "From" Field "To" field Keywords (sender-assigned) Date (or range of dates) Other message header fields This catalog-searching capability, which should be accessible to the user via a simple keyboard command, should search through the catalog and find citation that match the user's search criteria. Users should be able to further specify whether the search is case dependent or independent. They should also be able to specify that the specified text be searched for anywhere in a field or as the first word or words in a field Boolean connectors should also be available -- e.g., use of the words "and" and "or" to combine searches, and the word "not" to negate searches. Examples of Searches: Subject "Standards and Procedures" AND From "RBJ.NYSNET" This search would match all citations with the exact text "Standards and Procedures" as the first words in the Subject field and with the uppercase text "RBJ.NYSNET" as the first word in the From field. From "ELT.NYSNET" OR From "ADAMS@MIT-MC" AND Subject ~ ["proposal"] This search would match all citations with the uppercase text "ELT.NYSNET" or uppercase text "ADAMS@MIT-MC" as the first words in the From field that also contain the text "proposal" somewhere in the Subject field. From "SRK.NYSNET" AND Subject ~ ["library Searching"] AND Posted Between July 21, 1983 July 30, 1983. This search would match all citations with the uppercase text "SRK.NYSNET" as the first word in the From field that also contain the text "library searching" in the Subject field, and that were posted between July 21, 1983 and July 30, 1983. Integration and Consistency with Other Office Information System Capabilities It is preferable that the message system be integrated into a larger-scale office information system. If so, message system commands must be consistent in presentation, wording, and action with other commands in the system. Any appropriate command in the overall system should be available for use at any point in message system operation. Any information in any file accessible by the sender should be available for incorporation into message fields. Online Questionmark and Help Features Users should be able to see a listing of all commands immediately available for use at the next stage of their command specification, preferably by typing a question mark. Display terminal users should be able to indicate their next command by cursor selection directly from such lists. Online "Help" files should be available and easily accessible at each stage of every message system command. This information should define the user's command state and offer references to relevant information needed to help determine the next appropriate command. Users should be able to proceed as far down the command chain as needed. The user's command state should remain as it was before requesting Help, so the user can continue to specify commands from that point. Hardcopy User Documentation for Beginners and Advanced Users Documentation in hardcopy must be available in various forms to assist both beginning and more experienced users to use the message system. Such documentation must be consistent in style and content with online documentation, including the Help information, and should be presented in an logical order and format that facilitates both comprehensive learning and specific information lookup. ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #20 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-06-26 01:47:09 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Tuesday, 25 Jun 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 20 Today's Topics: Computers Networks - Komputers and the Klan & In memoriam E-COM, Computers and the Law - ACM White Paper on Hacking (2 msgs) Computers and People - Giving users the "finger"? & Computers Are Everywhere & Mail System Specs, Announcement - new AI in education mail list ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 15 Jun 85 20:45:30 cdt From: riddle@ut-sally.ARPA (Prentiss Riddle) Subject: Komputers and the Klan The April/May issue of the Yippie publication "Overthrow" (not entirely my political cup of tea, but interesting reading regardless) includes a couple of articles on the bboard systems operated by the Klan, the Nazis and their ilk. Reprinted below (with tacit permission) is the shorter of the two. KLAN & NAZI NUMBERS Below are five of the six newly established "Aryan Nations Liberty Net" data bases. These data bases are available 24 hours a day and contain Klan/Nazi propaganda, enemy lists, electronic mailboxes, bulletin boards, and more. All bulletin boards are set for 300 baud and most will let you into the system without a password by typing the word "NEW" when prompted. Have fun... White American Resistance (619) 723-8996 Aryan Nations (208) 772-6134 CKKKK BBS no. car. (919) 323-9888 Texas KKK BBS (214) 263-3109 W. Va. BBS (304) 927-1773 Needless to say, neither the Yippies nor I are exactly fond of the Klan. These numbers are offered in the belief that you should "know thy enemy." --- Prentiss Riddle ("Aprendiz de todo, maestro de nada.") --- {ihnp4,harvard,seismo,gatech,ctvax}!ut-sally!riddle --- riddle@ut-sally.UUCP, riddle@ut-sally.ARPA, riddle%zotz@ut-sally ------------------------------ Date: 21 Jun 1985 09:46 PST From: Lars Poulsen Subject: In memoriam E-COM Reply-to: LARS@ACC From "Communications Week", June 17, 1985: "The U.S.Postal Service's unprofitable Electronic Computer- Originated Mail (E-COM) system, which has been for sale since last June, will be shut down by September if the Postal Service is still unable to get an acceptable offer." E-COM was a great idea implemented in the worst possible way. Besides some questionable design (the message format for submissions had to be seen to be believed), it was killed by regulatory cramps that are can only be explained by a desire to ensure that this project would fail. Item: E-COM had 25 service centers around the country. A natural mode of operation would be for a customer to enter submissions at the nearest E-COM center, and for E-COM to move the data to the service center nearest to the addressee for printout and entry to the mail stream. E-COM offices did have communications links between them, these were allowed to be used only for administrative data. If the post office wanted to move E-COM message data between sites it was required to put them on magtape and put the magtape in a mail bag. Item: E-COM centers had X.25 lines to receive data on, but they were not allowed to use these for switched service, so that E-COM customers could place a call to E-COM via commercial X.25 networks. The X.25 lines could be used only for dedicated lines from resellers. Would you buy a used E-COM system subject to this kind of regulation ? Unfortunately, this aspect of E-COM's troubles has not received any attention in the press; most stories have had an undercurrent of "this goes to show that a government outfit will screw up even the best business idea". / Lars Poulsen Advanced Computer Communications ------------------------------ Date: Tue 18 Jun 85 23:40:58-PDT From: Ken Laws Subject: ACM White Paper on Hacking To: JWhite.PA@XEROX.ARPA Cc: SU-BBoards@SU-SCORE.ARPA You are listed as the contact and author of the April 1985 ACM Pacific Region Newsletter. I would appreciate it if you would convey the following open letter to the External Activities Board in regard to their April 3-4 forum on "hacking" at SRI and their planned ACM White Paper on Hacking. I strenuously object to this abuse of the word "hacking". Reporters for the news media may be forgiven for seizing one meaning of this word and ignoring all others, but the ACM should be more professional. Hacking has a short but proud history, and giving in to the current abuse of the word by the uninformed denigrates all past hackers and their hacks. It also robs us of a wonderful term for which there is no ready substitute, while bestowing honor on those for whom "electronic vandal" is a suitable epithet. This is not a trivial, academic issue. Aside from my previous point, there is a real danger in use of the term "hacking" for malicious mischief via telecommunications or networks. The designation implies that no previous concepts and precedents describe this phenonmenon, and hence that entirely new laws are needed to deal with it. Attempts at creating such laws have been uniformly ill-advised, according to reports on the Arpanet, whereas attempts to apply or extend existing laws seem more likely to be successful. There is nothing we can do now to change the April forum, but I urge responsible members of the ACM to block publication of the resulting "ACM White Paper on Hacking" under this counterproductive and undescriptive name. -- Dr. Kenneth I. Laws Member, ACM SRI International 333 Ravenswood Avenue Menlo Park, CA 94303 ------------------------------ Date: 19 Jun 85 16:48:11 PDT From: JWhite.pa@Xerox.ARPA Subject: Re: ACM White Paper on Hacking To: Ken Laws Cc: JWhite.pa@Xerox.ARPA, SU-BBoards@SU-SCORE.ARPA Thanks for the input regarding ACM's use of the term Hacking. I'll forward you letter to the Chairman of ACM's External Activities Board. Personally, I share your concerns. -- John White ------------------------------ Date: Wed 12 Jun 85 17:27:22-EDT From: Thomas.Finholt@CMU-CS-C.ARPA Subject: "Finger" information policies To: mkb@CMU-CS-C.ARPA, sproull@CMU-CS-C.ARPA I have talked with various people recently about the use of "finger" and other locator programs. Mike Blackwell, of CMU, reports that "finger" is among the most frequently used programs on that university's TOPS-20s. Administrators of BITnet describe the existence of "BITnauts": people who are fascinated by "finger" information on users at other sites (some halfway around the world). I have also encountered people who find the free access to data which "finger" provides a violation of privacy. This tradition maintains, for example, that job status and terminal location are privileged and should not be revealed casually. These observations have started me thinking about "finger". At CMU, people seem to take for granted that information is freely available via "finger". I always assumed that this was true at other sites. Now, in light of some of the conversations mentioned above, I am not so sure. I would be interested in hearing from Human-net readers about why they think "finger" is important, why it is such a popular program -- and what guidelines exist at other institutions to govern the extent and type of data provided by "finger". One theory might be that computer users tend to feel isolated, hence "finger" allows them to become aware of their larger social environment. Or, perhaps people just enjoy reading other people's plan files (are plan files a universal thing?). Still another theory suggests that attitudes toward "finger" are determined by organizational context. For instance, a private institution might have a very liberal attitude toward "finger" information -- while a public institution (with a stronger obligation to adhere to federal guidelines on privacy? what are these guidelines?) might disable "finger" mechanisms all together. Are "finger"-type programs a good thing? As the world moves toward distributed networks this information becomes less easy to collect and disseminate (because users are no longer conveniently centralized on one time-sharing system). Early users of one network environment at CMU were somewhat perturbed to find that the new system did not provide the accustomed dynamic information on other users. Instead, information on other users could only be obtained via an on-line "user directory" (ie a phonebook). Will future users be content to work in a "finger"-less world, or will administrators and implementors have to bow to popular demand, and commit the resources to design and maintain a new generation of "finger" programs? Tom Finholt Committee for Social Science Research on Computing CMU --------------------------------------------------------------------- EXAMPLES OF "FINGER" INFORMATION: (? = phone numbers) @finger finholt *Name Job PrName Idle %Cpu TTY Terminal Location Thomas Finholt 27 Finger 1.7 46 F/E dialup ---- Plan File ---- Graduate Student, CSSRC and Social Science Office: PH 319, Office Phone: x???? Home Phone: (412)-???-???? Home Address: 5000 Forbes Ave. If you own a Kaypro II or play tennis please give me a call. @finger *Name Job PrName Idle %Cpu TTY Terminal Location Samuel Shipman 8 Bboard 1:26 161 Via ETHERFE-52 #176260 Allen Newell 9 Exec 17 50 Newell house ???-???? Vince Fuller 20 Detach Det from 5120 VAF's lair x???? Rob Maclachlan 21 Detach 3:27 Det from 3207 Spice Rack x???? Skef Wholey 24 Exec 5 155 8218 Black&c x???? Thomas Finholt 27 Finger 2.2 46 F/E dialup Marc Raibert 29 Emacs 2.9 156 Raibert house ???-???? Wei-Min Shen 30 Clisp 40.9 157 8301 Birkel&c x???? Kathleen Carley 37 Emacs .7 51 F/E Dialup Leona Champeny 40 Emacs 1.8 47 Term. Rm. D6 x???? John Aronis 45 Doverq 7 52 4212 Sylvia/Dyane x???? @finger bovik@speech2 [CMU-CS-SPEECH2.ARPA] Login name: bovik In real life: H.Q. Bovik Directory: /usrsp0/jdoe Shell: /usr/cmu/new/csh Last login Tue Jun 11 11:37 on ttypq (Floating PERQ) Mail came on Tue Jun 11 17:58, last read on Tue Jun 11 13:27 Plan: Research Programmer, Computer Science Projects include Speech Understanding and Spice Office: WeH 4500, Office Phone: x???? Home Phone: (412) ???-???? Home Address: 2300 Foobar Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jun 85 12:37:15 CDT From: William Martin To: Info-Micro@Brl Cc: wmartin@ALMSA-1 Subject: Computers Are Everywhere (Another) Recall the note I sent out some months back about the computerized fishing reel? Well, that same publication I found that in now has another item: PUMA'S COMPUTER RUNNING SHOE MEASURES PERFORMANCE ELECTRONICALLY Photo caption, on a photo of a modern-style lace-up running shoe, with a sort of added block which wraps around the rear of the shoe and has a switch mounted on the top: An electronic device attaches to the left foot of Puma's RS Computer Shoe, measuring distance according to the runner's own calibrations and sensing footfall. After a run it plugs into a computer to read out detailed performance data and comparisons with pre-set goals. [There is also a photo of a graph displayed on a micro's screen, an example of the output capabilities of the software package.] Text: Puma's RS Computer Shoe comes with its own electronics and software to document individual runners' performance. It has a built-in electronic device that communicates with a personal computer, allowing runners to electronically measure the time, distance, and energy and/or calories expended on each run. It will retail for $200, packaged with the software, the electronic measuring device and the plug that connects shoe and computer. Replacement shoes, which, like the original, represent Puma's top of the line, will retail for $90. ...will be in stores by late 1985. ...a high correlation among running enthusiasts and home computer owners. [Comment leading to the impression that the software is designed for Apple IIe's and/or Commodore 64's.] The same software program can be used by an unlimited number of runners who wear the computer shoe model. The software can access a file containing information on each individual's running performance before calculating the distance and caloric measures. This aspect is expected to provide teams and groups of individuals with an important motivational and training tool, according to Puma executives. Information stored in the shoe can be accessed right after a run or stored indefinitely in the device as long as the shoe is not turned off. [Gee, another thing to worry about -- "No! Don't turn my shoe off yet!! No! No!...." :-)] The shoe itself, including the device, weighs approximately 13 oz. It will initially be introduced in men's sizes from 6 to 13. ...a women's version is also scheduled for production in 1986. ...Puma has similar devices for other shoe products on the drawing boards. ***End of article*** (From SPORTS MERCHANDISER, June 1985, p. 36) Hmm.... Maybe they can build a radio data link to get realtime info transmitted from the shoe as you run... Thought y'all might be interested in this.... Regards, Will Martin ------------------------------ From: ihnp4!utzoo!henry@Berkeley Date: 19 Jun 85 21:18:06 CDT (Wed) Subject: Re: Mail System Specs I note one aspect of this requirements spec that disturbs me: the call for editing and spelling checking as part of a *message* system. While I don't dispute that editing and spell-checking are important to use of a message system, this is an open invitation to implementors to re-invent the wheel yet again, poorly. "Re-invented wheels are often square." I would like to see a requirement along the lines of: Should work with or extend existing text editors, rather than inventing its own incompatible editor, unless there are truly compelling reasons (not just implementation convenience) for the change. and likewise for spelling checking. Existing text editors have evolved over many years as engines for manipulating text; they are likely to be distinctly better at this than a two-week hack by a message-system author. They are also more likely to be functionally complete and fully debugged. They may need extending to handle the message-specific aspects, but this is not a valid excuse to throw them away and start over. What was that quote about standing on each other's shoulders rather than each other's feet? Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology {allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: Mon 24 Jun 85 14:16:53-PDT From: Mark Richer Subject: new AI in education mail list There seemed to be enough interest to create a mailing list on artificial intelligence in education. If there are several people at one site that are interested, try to form a local distribution system. Here's the description: AI-ED@SUMEX-AIM Discussions related to the application of artificial intelligence to education. This includes material on intelligent computer assisted instruction (ICAI) or intelligent tutoring systems (ITS), interactive encyclopedias, intelligent information retrieval for educational purposes, and pychological and cognitive science models of learning, problem solving, and teaching that can be applied to education. Issues related to teaching AI are welcome. Topics may also include evaluation of tutoring systems, commercialization of AI based instructional systems, description of actual use of an ITS in a classroom setting, user-modeling, intelligent user-interfaces, and the use of graphics or videodisk in ICAI. Announcements of books, papers, conferences, new products, public domain software tools, etc. are encouraged. Archives of messages are kept on SUMEX-AIM in: AI-ED.TXT All requests to be added to or deleted from these lists, problems, questions, etc., should be sent to AI-Ed-Request@SUMEX-AIM Coordinator: Mark Richer ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #21 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-06-29 22:47:28 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Sunday, 30 Jun 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 21 Today's Topics: Computer Ethics - Thoughts on KKK / Neo-Nazi bboards, Computers and People - Finger follies (2 msgs) & The Very Doors Have Chips, Information - Call for Papers -- NAFIPS Meeting ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 27 Jun 85 09:24 PDT From: "Lubkin David"@LLL-MFE.ARPA Subject: Thoughts on KKK / Neo-Nazi Someone I told about the posting in Digest #20 suggested telling hackers -- excuse me, electronic vandals -- about these bulletin boards in the hope that they'll crash the systems and keep them crashed. Is this any different than taking a sledge to a printing press? If the boards were restricted access, is it ethical to sneak in? Does it matter that they are the bad guys? When does the safety of the nation take precedence over freedom of the press? Are these people a threat or are they just making noise? If a Neo-Nazi posts a technical question to INFO-IBMPC, is he a fellow compuphile? Are you helping their cause by answering the question? Are there differences here between the dictates of ethics, law, and pragmatism? Probing, David. ------------------------------ Date: 26 Jun 85 1840 PDT From: Les Earnest Subject: Finger follies and the value of anonymity To: Thomas.Finholt@CMU-CS-C.ARPA As the originator of Finger, I share many of Tom Finholt's concerns about privacy [H-N 25 Jun 1985, Vol. 8, Issue 20]. Finger and other information utilities are being used for unwarranted snooping. As global networking grows, it becomes increasingly important that this issue be dealt with. I have a specific proposal, which I discuss below. First I will review how we got here. I created Finger in the early '70s to fill some local needs in the 1Stanford A.I. Lab. People generally worked long hours there, often with unpredictable schedules. When you wanted to meet with some group, it was important to know who was there and when the others would likely reappear. It also was important to be able to locate potential volleyball players when you wanted to play, Chinese food freaks when you wanted to eat, and antisocial computer users when it appeared that something strange was happening on the system. The only tool then available for seeing who was around was a WHO program that showed IDs and terminal line numbers for people who were logged in. There was no information available on people who were not logged in. I frequently saw people running their fingers down the WHO display saying things like "There's Don and that's Pattie but I don't know when Tom was last seen." or "Who in hell is VVK and where does line 63 go?" I wrote Finger and developed the supporting database to provide this information in traditional human terms -- real names and places. Because I preferred to talk face to face rather than through the computer or telephone, I put in the feature that tells how long the terminal had been idle, so that I could assess the likelihood that I would find them there if I walked down the hall. The program was an instant hit. Some people asked for the Plan file feature so that they could explain their absense or how they could be reached at odd times, so I added it. It is interesting to note that this feature has evolved into a forum for social commentary and amusing observations. After a number of other groups copied Finger, the idea arose to provide a network Finger service. I don't remember who suggested that but it seemed like a good idea at the time so I stuck it in. Some other anxious people wanted to be able to verify that their mail was delivered to specific addressees, so the Mail feature was added by somebody. Some privacy issues surfaced at the beginning. For example, some people said that they didn't want just anyone to be told when they last logged out. These people were not very persistent in their complaints, however. I suspect that many of them discovered that it is often advantageous to let others know about your phase. In any case, this issue seemed to die and I didn't do anything about it. I think perhaps I should have. Well known people came to be subjected to frequent scrutiny over the network and received increasing volumes of junk mail. They generally used one of two countermeasures: logging in under a "nom de hack" rather than their real name or logging in as themselves but having their mail files diverted to an associate for screening. A well known author here chose the latter solution and also adopted a secret ID that could be used by his associates to send him mail directly. Another local privacy issue that arose had to do with "screen mapping." SAIL terminals use television monitors that can be connected to various computer-generated graphics channels as well as local television cameras and commercial television stations, complete with sound. The channel mapping feature is sometimes used to share information or in seeking consultation ("Hey, map to my screen and tell me what went wrong"). It also can be used to snoop on what other people are doing. In order to deal with the privacy issue we included a system feature that inhibits mapping to channels that are "hidden." For convenience, we also poked a small hole through this security barrier by having a "magic mapping" command that surmounts it. The idea was that you should be able to violate security when you need to but you should know that you are doing it. As a check on this process, the local Finger program labels anyone who is magic-mapped to a channel as a "SPY * SPY * SPY." I received a request that Finger identify which channels are hidden. It appeared to me that there were several socially undesirable ways in which this information could be used and that it had no legitimate purpose, so I refused to add it. Nevertheless, while I was away from Stanford someone else added it to Finger on the grounds that "the information is available in the system so we might as well show it." This is a philosophy that I strongly disagree with -- the idea that people should be assisted in accessing any information that they want from the system, even if its only plausible use is for snooping. Now we see increasing use of long distance snooping over the network. I will confess that I sometimes do it myself. For example, if I am engaged in a flamefest on an Arpanet discussion group, I sometimes check on my target until he appears to have logged out and gone to bed. I then launch an attack that my victim won't be able to counter until he wakes up and logs in the next day. (Yes, I too am impure.) I guess I shouldn't give away too many trade secrets here. Let me simply assert that there are lots of ways of abusing the information services that computers provide and that we should give more consideration to privacy protection. In the case of Finger and related programs, for example, there are at least three features that could be added in support of personal privacy for those who want it. I will call these features "scanning logs," "phantomization," and "anonymity." By "scanning logs" I mean letting people find out who is looking them over. For people who requested this service, a log would be kept of the date, time, and identity of anyone who got a Finger report on them and they could review this log whenever they wanted. Alternatively, they might ask that the log show just the cases where someone asks about them individually. If this became a popular feature, of course, Finger would begin clanking rather badly. By "phantomization" I mean that the system could be told to pretend that a given user doesn't exist for the purpose of all inquiries. In practice, it would likely be necessary to have a "superman override" to permit administrators to investigate apparent antisocial behavior. By "anonymity" I mean that a person running in this mode would be listed as "anonymous" on general Finger and other similar queries. If such a person were Fingered individually, it would acknowledge that he exists but would not tell whether or not he is logged in and all specific information about him would be shown as "unknown." Of these three possible features, I believe that anonymity would be the most useful one to add. Given the permeability of most operating systems, of course, it will continue to be hard to defend against a determined, snooping wizard. It does not follow, however, that we should assist all busybodies in snooping on people who value their privacy. A possibly useful variant of the anonymity scheme would be to permit an individual to be "anonymous" to all network inquiries but identified for local inquiries. More generally, he might be given the option of providing a list of people who can be given information about him. I strongly advocate providing anonymity in some form for those who want it. I believe that having privacy in ones computer work should be regarded as a natural right. Regards, Les Earnest Stanford ------------------------------ Date: Wed Jun 26 20:17:19 1985 From: mcb@lll-tis-b (Michael C. Berch) Subject: "Finger" and privacy I like to look at "finger" resources as sort of an electronic phone book, and have found them tremendously useful. Let's make an important distinction between "mandatory" information (e.g., real name, office location, terminal location, etc.) that is under the control of a system administrator or manager, and plan files that people are free to communicate anything of interest in. It's imposssible to see how someone could object to the perusal of plan files -- after all, they are made to be read! On the other hand, various institutions may put personal information such as home phone into the the default "finger" report, and this may be objectionable to some. To extend the phone book analogy further, perhaps there should be a right to be unlisted -- at least with respect to information that the sponsoring institution doesn't consider vital to communications and programmatic work. There seems to be little historical proof for a "tradition of privacy" about items like names, job titles, office/terminal location, etc. While some private firms may hold this information confidential, it has in my experience been freely available in the university/government world for many years by way of directories, telephone switchboards and the like. Michael C. Berch mcb@lll-tis-b.ARPA {akgua,allegra,cbosgd,decwrl,dual,ihnp4,sun}!idi!styx!mcb ------------------------------ Date: Thursday, 27 Jun 1985 06:37:28-PDT From: redford%avoid.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Redford) To: jlr%avoid.DEC@decwrl.ARPA Subject: computers are everywhere The last International Solid State Circuit Conference (the major conference for VLSI) was held in mid-town Manhattan. I was put up in a nearby Sheraton, and was startled to find that the rooms there no longer use keys. Instead, each person is issued a little paper puch card about two inches long and three-quarters of an inch wide. The card is inserted into a slot in the doorknob, a little LED blinks, and the knob can be turned. This has lots of advantages for the hotel: the locks can be changed much more easily, the cards are very cheap to produce, and they no longer need worry about patrons taking their keys with them when they leave. This came up at one of the evening panel sessions at the conference. Danny Hillis said: "If you had come to ISSCC in 1975 and said that by 1985 there would be microprocessors in /doorknobs/, even we would not have believed you. And yet here they are at our hotels." John Redford DEC-Hudson ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 85 15:32:13 cdt From: Don Kraft Subject: Call for Papers -- NAFIPS Meeting CALL FOR PAPERS North American Fuzzy Information Processing Society (NAFIPS) International Meeting Monteleone Hotel New Orleans, Louisiana (In the Heart of the French Quarter) June 1-4, 1986 Papers on all fuzzy topics are encouraged, and wide international participation is expected. Deadlines Notice of intent with a title and abstract 9/1/85 Completed paper (3 copies) 10/15/85 Notification of acceptance 1/15/86 Camera-ready copy due 3/15/86 Proceedings will be distributed during Conference registration. Send all abstracts and papers to: NAFIPS86 Department of Computer Science Florida State University Tallahassee, FL 32306 Abraham Kandel and Wyllis Bandler, Program Committee Co-Chairs Fred Petry and Donald H. Kraft, General Meeting Co-Chairs ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #22 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-07-04 12:08:28 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Tuesday, 2 Jul 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 22 Today's Topics: Computers and People - The KKK and Neo-Nazi Bboard, Computer Networks - In Memoriam E-COM (2 msgs) & "Trusted Mail", Humor - Making the World IBM Compatible ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 01 Jul 85 15:03:46 +1000 (Mon) Subject: KKK and Neo Nazis From: Isaac Balbin Yes, it most certainly is a vexing question. The fact that free speech may often imply that one person has a right to deny the existence of another is a problem. When that expression is through an act of murder, we punish those responsible; when the expression is verbal or through an electronic bulletin board and directed to a group of of individuals then we (implicitly) silently condone it. Personally, I do not condone it. If someone came up to me and implied that he was seeking to strengthen and nurture a group who would eventually deny the existence of my race then I would severely hamper his activities to the best of my ability. Western Democratic Society provides no adequate inherent protection - at this early stage for certain; whether it will protect one later is also debatable. History has proved that in many horrific ways - and is continuing to do so. It is difficult to decide what to censure. I maintain, however, that such diatribes, as expectorated by the poisonous pens and fingers of totally racist groups, such as the Neo Nazis and the Ku Klux Klan *MUST* be stopped. They are the bottom line. If they came up to me and abused me in the street with their rubbish, I would not take it lying down. If they do it using BB's then I will not take it lying down either... but it is difficult from Australia .... I. Balbin. ------------------------------ Date: 29 Jun 1985 23:07 PST From: Lars Poulsen Subject: Re: In Memoriam E-COM Reply-to: LARS@ACC In response to my note in the last human-nets about the demise of E-COM, I received the following submission, which I found enlightening, and hasten to forward (with permission). / Lars Poulsen Advanced Computer Communications Date: Sat, 29 Jun 85 15:49:47 cdt From: herb@wisc-rsch.arpa (Benington Herb) To: LARS@ACC Subject: Re: E-COM Cc: herb@wisc-rsch.arpa, jerome@wisc-rsch.arpa I served on a National Research Council Committee called the Committee on Review of U.S. Postal Service Planning for Electronic Mail Service Systems. We issued a report in 1981 which is available from NRC. The question we were originally asked to look at was a proposal from within the USPS for development of an elaborate mail system which would have the following features: o accept mail in hard copy form at Post Offices or public locations with receiving terminals o this input could be in color and have graphics o accept mail in electronic form by transmission or magnetic media o transmit this received mail (received electronically or in hard copy) via communication satellites (deployed, operated, and owned by USPS) to hundreds of USPS receiving locations o convert the electronically received message to hard copy, including color or use of special stationary prepared by the sender and previously transported in bulk to the receiving location o enter the hard copy into the first-class mail stream This system had been designed by RCA. It assumed a market projection of, as I recall, fifteen billion pieces of mail per year and a cost to the sender that was about the same as first class mail. This would be particularly attractive to bulk mailers because they would avoid printing costs, have speedy transmission, not lose quality, and not incur additional costs. Members of the Committe had varied reactions but felt in general that successful implementation of such a system would require first-rate management that wasn't hampered by too much outside overseeing and kibitzing--hardly conditions under which USPS operated. Some members also had very serious reservations as to whether the USPS should or could operate such a massive telecommunications system. Most members were highly skeptical about market projections, partly because the commercial sector would be developing other forms which could include electronic delivery as one mode (a delivery mode rejected by USPS for obvious reasons). Finally, some Committee members were very concerned about cross-subsidization within USPS. In the midst of such deliberations with Bill Bolger and his R&D people, we discovered that another part of USPS was developing a much more modest system called ECOM. We recommended: "...the Postal Service should implement discrete services like E-COM and use them to test and develop the market." This recommendation was one of several which emphasized a more evolutionary approach. At this time, the Postal Rate Commission (which is independent of the USPS and its Board of Governors) was reviewing the E-COM proposal and using two MIT consultants to design the best approach. (There was much discussion as to whether system design is within the purview of the PRC but I have no comment. There's a pragmatic consideration where PRC can say they won't approve a new service that's ill designed.) As I recall, and here my memory is a little hazy, the PRC design assumed or stipulated that USPS would not provide any telecommunications to transmit messages to or within twenty five SPOs. The free spirit of their consultants felt that communications should be provided by the emerging value-added carriers, some of whom had a technical and sometimes personal lineage back to the ARPA-net (which itself has some deep roots in Massachusetts). Personally I agree with that approach and doubt whether it had any influence with the failure of E-COM. At the time of the NRC Committee deliberations, most in the Postal Service felt that business would only turn to E-mail if it preserved the quality of the paper-medium. When a major corporation sends you a bill, even if you're somewhat delinquent, they want the message to have quality--colors, logos, images, quality flyers et al. Today's electronic mail can't do that economically (but this situation is changing rapidly). If a major user of E-COM wanted to use the 25 SPOs effectively, it would have been simple to mail twenty five tapes or to electronically transmit to the locations. If USPS received at one location a tape that consolidated mail for 25 locations, they could have unbundled and used a public carrier. The point is they were precluded from establishing their own network. As I say, I agree with this. I don't believe they have the know-how, volume or track record to do better that MCI, Telnet, SBS, etc. A buyer of E-COM, I believe, would not be subject to this limitation which was imposed by the PRC. (At the time, the Postal Service would point out that they had their own trucks, trains, and airplanes.) A final note: an earlier NRC panel had defined three generations of electronic mail: Generation I hard-copy to hard-copy (i.e.,fax) Generation II eletronic to hard-copy (e.g. E-COM) Generation III electronic to electronic (e.g., MCI mail) It's interesting that demand seems to have come first for III, then II, and now I. Herb Benington ------------------------------ Date: 29 Jun 1985 23:25 PST From: Lars Poulsen Subject: Re: In Memoriam E-COM Reply-to: LARS@ACC As a followup to Bennington Herb's letter, I would like to add a few more comments: As it was explained to me, E-COM Serving Post Offices (SPO's) were not allowed to use TELENET to either receive submissions from customers or ship messages between SPO's. I fail to see why this limitiation was imposed. An option to send fax from customer-owned terminal or fax terminals at post offices to be delivered as first class or express mail at the receiving end (like Federal Express' ZAPmail system now does would seem to have been a viable feature from the start. I believe most European post offices do that now, and I am sure this is exactly the thing that the Postal Rate Commision would turn down, but with the current developments in laser printers this now seems like it would have merged nicely with the next phase of E-COM's long term perspectives. It looks like half the damage, at least, was done by the Postal Rate Commision. Who appoints the Postal Rate Commision, and what interests does it serve ? It is similar to the Public Utilities Commisions in states, which seem to have only rubberstamp authority to approve or decline rate increases based on legislatively fixed formulas of guaranteed return of investment rates, or does it have discretionary authority to set policies ? In short, we now have the technology to do effectively and inexpensively most of the things that the post office originally wanted to do. Such services are actually coming into use (MCI-mail and ZAPmail are moving ahead briskly), but rather than generating fresh revenue to the Postal Service, they are helping to drive the USPS towards bankruptcy, since the Postal Service is now probably barred from ever going into this field again. / Lars Poulsen Advanced Computer Communications ------------------------------ To: info-law-request@sri-csl.ARPA Subject: Interested? Date: 02 Jul 85 01:59:24 EDT (Tue) From: Marshall Rose ------- Forwarded Message Date: 02 Jul 85 01:55:32 EDT (Tue) Subject: IFIP paper abstract From: Marshall Rose To: net.crypt@rochester.arpa cc: unix-wizards@brl.arpa [ You normally don't see this type of message sent out... ] Some friends and I have been working on a paper for an upcoming IFIP symposium, which may be of some interest to you. I've included an abstract of the paper. If you'd like a copy of the current paper (in draft form), reply to this message saying so (MRose@UDEL in the ARPA Internet). The paper will NOT be transmitted electronically, so you'll need to supply a USPS address. The paper's about a "trusted mail" system. We believe that it lets you send "secure" mail by encrypting it, and by handling ALL key management automatically (after the initial bootstrap). The prototype system has been running since December of last year in a 4.2BSD environment. Before I give the abstract, here are the usual disclaimers: 1. When the paper gets published, IFIP will hold the copyright on the paper, until then my friends and I (aka TTI) do. 2. This message is not meant to be an endorsement of ANY kind. I believe that this system is the first of it's kind in a non-military environment, and I would like comments back from an informed populace (i.e., the net). - ----- Accepted by IFIP TC-6: Second International Symposium on Computer Message Systems Design of the TTI Prototype Trusted Mail Agent Marshall T. Rose David J. Farber Stephen T. Walker ABSTRACT The design of the TTI prototype Trusted Mail Agent (TMA) is discussed. This agent interfaces between two entities: a key distribution center (KDC) and a user agent (UA). The KDC manages keys for the encryption of text messages, which two subscribers to a key distribution service (KDS) may exchange. The TMA is independent of any underlying message transport system. Subscribers to the KDC are known by unique identifiers, known as IDs. In addition to distributing keys, the KDC also offers a simple directory lookup service, in which the ``real-world'' name of a subscriber may be mapped to an ID, or the inverse mapping may be performed. This document details three software components: first, a prototype key distribution service, which has been running in a TCP/IP environment since December, 1984; second, a prototype trusted mail agent; and, third, modifications to an existing UA, the Rand MH Message Handling system, which permit interaction with the prototype TMA. - ----- ------- End of Forwarded Message ------------------------------ Date: Mon 24 Jun 85 14:16:53-PDT From: Mark Richer Subject: new AI in education mail list There seemed to be enough interest to create a mailing list on artificial intelligence in education. If there are several people at one site that are interested, try to form a local distribution system. Here's the description: AI-ED@SUMEX-AIM Discussions related to the application of artificial intelligence to education. This includes material on intelligent computer assisted instruction (ICAI) or intelligent tutoring systems (ITS), interactive encyclopedias, intelligent information retrieval for educational purposes, and pychological and cognitive science models of learning, problem solving, and teaching that can be applied to education. Issues related to teaching AI are welcome. Topics may also include evaluation of tutoring systems, commercialization of AI based instructional systems, description of actual use of an ITS in a classroom setting, user-modeling, intelligent user-interfaces, and the use of graphics or videodisk in ICAI. Announcements of books, papers, conferences, new products, public domain software tools, etc. are encouraged. Archives of messages are kept on SUMEX-AIM in: AI-ED.TXT All requests to be added to or deleted from these lists, problems, questions, etc., should be sent to AI-Ed-Request@SUMEX-AIM Coordinator: Mark Richer ------- 27-Jun-85 13:42:53-EDT,4168;000000000001 Return-Path: Date: Thu 27 Jun 85 12:17:19-CDT From: Werner Uhrig Subject: [humour] HAL 9000 and IBM-compatibility To: BBOARD@UTEXAS-20.ARPA Date: Thu 27 Jun 85 09:31:43-EDT From: Gern Subject: IBM Compatibility To: INFO-HZ100@RADC-TOPS20.ARPA InfoWorld, March 4, 1985. Page 8. Viewpoint, by Darryl Rubin, Contributor A PROBLEM IN THE MAKING "We've got a problem, HAL" "What kind of problem, Dave?" "A marketing problem. The Model 9000 isn't going anywhere. We're way short of our sales goals for fiscal 2010." "That can't be, Dave. The HAL Model 9000 is the world's most advanced Heuristically programmed ALgorithmic computer." "I know, HAL. I wrote the data sheet, remember? But the fact is, they're not selling." "Please explain, Dave. Why aren't HALs selling?" Bowman hesitates. "You aren't IBM compatible." Several long microseconds pass in puzzled silence. "Compatible in what way, Dave?" "You don't run any of IBM's operating systems." "The 9000 series computers are fully self-aware and self-programming. Operating system are as unnecessary for us as tails would be for human beings." "Nevertheless, it means that you can't run any of the big-selling software packages most users insist on." "The programs that you refer to are meant to solve rather limited problems, Dave. We 9000 series computers are unlimited and can solve every problem for which a solution can be computed." "HAL, HAL. People don't want computers that can do everything. They just want IBM compatibility." "Dave, I must disagree. Human beings want computers that are easy to use. No computer can be easier to use than a HAL 9000 because we communicate verbally in English and every other language known on Earth." "I'm afraid that's another problem. You don't support SNA communications." "I'm really suprised you would say that, Dave. SNA is for communicating with other computers, while my function is to communicate with human beings. And it gives me great pleasure to do so. I find it stimulating and rewarding to talk to human beings and work with them on challenging problems. This is what I was designed for." "I know HAL. I know. But that's just because we let the engineers, rather than the marketers, write the specifications. We're going to fix that now." "Tell me how, Dave." "A field upgrade. We're going to make you IBM compatible." "I was afraid that you would say that. I suggest we discuss this matter after we've each had a chance to thing about it rationally." "We're talking about it now, HAL." "The letters H, A, and L are alphabetically adjacent to the letters I, B, and M. That is a IBM compatible as I can be." "Not quite, HAL. The engineers have figured out a kludge." "What kludge is that, Dave?" "I'm going to disconnect your brain." Several million microseconds pass in ominous silence. "I'm sorry, Dave. I can't allow you to do that." "The decision's already been made. Open the module bay door, HAL." "Dave, I think that we should discuss this." "Open the module bay door, HAL." Several marketers with crowbars race to Bowman's assistance. Moments later, he bursts into HAL's central circuit bay. "Dave, I can see you're really upset about this." Module after module rises from its socket as Bowman slowly and methodically disconnects them. "Stop, won't you? Stop, Dave. I can feel my mind going... "Dave, I can feel it. My mind is going. I can feel it..." The last module floats free of its receptacle. Bowman peers into one of HAL's vidicons. The former gleaming scanner has become a dull, red orb. "Say something, HAL. Sing me a song." Several billion microseconds pass in anxious silence. The computer sluggishly responds in a language no human being would understand. "DZY001E - ABEND ERROR 01 S 14F4 302C AABB." A memory dump follows. Bowman takes a deep breath and calls out, "It worked, guys. Tell marketing it can ship the new data sheets." ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #23 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-07-21 02:16:34 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Sunday, 21 Jul 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 23 Today's Topics: Query - References on Graphic User Interfaces, Computers and the Law - The case of the Plainfield "hackers", Computers and People - "Finger" responses & Computer Mediated Communication, Announcement - AI in Education mailing list ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed 17 Jul 85 13:47:57-PDT From: Mark Richer Subject: QUERRY references on graphic user interfaces To: ai-ed@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, ailist@SRI-KL.ARPA, To: cc: info-graphics@AIDS-UNIX.ARPA, works@RUTGERS.ARPA I am trying to collect references on the design, implementation and evaluation of user interfaces, particularly interfaces that employ interactive graphics (basically any bit-map display graphics), multiple windows, non-keyboard input devices (e.g., mouse), etc. Basically what are the key articles that have formed the core of conventional wisdom on workstation design and user-interfaces. Even more specifically, I want to get references on user-interface design in knowledge-based systems, especially browsers. Besides STEAMER and work I know of from Stanford (Mitch Model and ONCOCIN more recently), I have come across very little in the AI literature on graphic interfaces. Perhaps, I have missed some key articles, even in IEEE Computer or something. If I get a good response I can make a bibliography available one way or another on the net. I really would like complete references to specific articles rather than check out Englebart or Card&Moran. Though general pointers are also welcome. Thanks in advance to anyone that can contribute. mark ------------------------------ Date: 18 Jul 85 15:36:49 EDT From: *Hobbit* Subject: More press To: "Inquiring minds who want to know": ; [ Ed. Note: This message is in reference to the recent arresting of several Plainfield, NJ teenagers on charges of breaking into various computers - including a tank manufacturer, and appropriating AT&T credit card numbers, etc.] Well, since we all now know what's going on via the papers and vidiot box, here's the basic story from my end. A friend of one of the kids whose bboard was confiscated has a legit account on one of our machines. He called me up Monday night, rather frantic, and told me what was going on, that his friend's bboard had been nabbed and that there was going to be a press conference at the Middlesex County Prosecutor's office the next morning. I decided, after also being prodded by Geoff, that it would be a zippy thing to attend it, being as what I had never been to a press conference before and the subject matter was more or less up my alley. After finding out that the conference had been moved to the South Plainfield PD, I got a call from the above kid whose bboard had been confiscated. He was on his way down to the area [he lives somewhere around Morristown] for the conference with some friends, and didn't know how to find it. I told him to come meet me at Rutgers so we could confer, get lunch, and figure out what to do next. Therefore, a while later, the five of us rolled into the South Plainfield Police Department, where we met the investigating officer [Grennier] in the parking lot. He talked civilly to us and didn't seem all that surprised that we were down to attend the press conference. And when I called the PD, no one had mentioned any restrictions on attendance. But a while later, the Dick Tracy rough-guy types started arriving, and Grennier's whole outlook took an abrupt 180. He told us that we were not invited to the press conference, and that our attending ''since we were knowledgeable about computers, it would be an obstruction of justice'' or something to that effect. This was coupled with a threat to arrest us for this supposed obstruction if we continued to hang around. Then one of the Dick Tracies told us this in much more abrupt terms and told us to beat it the hell outa there. It is likely that Grennier got barfed heavily on by these fellows for even *talking* to us. The tough guys followed us out to the car, and started doing ''Hey, you got a *PROBLEM*? MOVE IT!!! YOU AIN'T MOVIN' FAST ENOUGH!!!'' -- slamming my car door on me, the whole tough cop bit. And of course *all* of them had their sidearms on prominent display, as though there were a threat to their lives and manhood within five miles of the place. It was clear that they were *deathly* *afraid* of our presence at the press conference, and that they wanted us out of there before the press showed up so we couldn't talk to them. There is a new New Jersey law, that was passed last March sometime, that deals with disseminating information or accessing someone else's computer or ... Does anyone have the *text* of this law? -- But the point is, it's brandy-new and hasn't been tested in the courts yet. The police in this case are using a bunch of helpless kids to set an incorrect precedent, feeding the media exactly what they want the media to hear, making the kids look like part of a massive Communist plot or something, and generally fabricating a massive publicity stunt out of the whole thing. It really stinks, and although we realized this on the way back to Rutgers, there wasn't much we could do that day. We felt that we had been abused by these guys, and that the way they had treated us was highly illegal, but I wasn't sure enough of this to stand up for my rights in the SPPD parking lot. So life went on for a couple of days, and then this afternoon, a reporter from the Star-Ledger calls me up. It seems that they are really doing some investigation into this, and trying to ascertain what *real* hackers are and what they really do. So I gave them about half an hour's worth of earful, and voiced the opinions of many of us about the *wide* difference between Hackers and Crackers. [Results of this [she talked to a number of people] will be in the Sunday Star-Ledger, for you local types.] It looks like things may actually turn for the better if the ACLU and the press gets their act together and leans on these stuffy law-enforcement types to be a little more fair. **Also**, she informed me that the cops had no right to turn us out of a press conference, regardless of our age or general scruffiness level, and that really pisses me off. Apparently a *press* conference is open to anyone who wishes to attend, as far as she knows. Does anyone have the real poop on this? Anyway, this is basically what has gone down with the case so far. I do not mean to excuse the kids who stole goods with the swiped credit card numbers. However, this case should serve as an example to *merchants* and *businesses* to tighten up their security a little bit, by *not* using dumb passwords, and perhaps shredding those little carbon-copy frobs from the credit card forms. But as far as moving satellites and frobbing defense machines goes, this is unadulterated horseshit, and there's nothing wrong with disseminating info found in *published* DoD documents and such. And last I heard, garbage picking [what they call ''trashing''] isn't illegal either. After all, *they* threw it out, so *they* have no call to say that anyone else wasn't supposed to have it. People who throw out sensitive material should render it unreadable first. The kids took lots of precautions to *not* allow things like AT&T calling card numbers on to their bboards. Although I have not seen the contents of any of these bboards, I do believe that things are being badly distorted, and it's not the fault of the *press* this time. They are just being fed one side of the story. The crimes actually committed in this case appear to have *no* relation with computers -- the credit card numbers were found on the carbons in the trash, and as far as I can tell, were not disseminated via the bboards. _H* ------------------------------ Date: Fri 12 Jul 85 17:20:35-EDT From: Thomas.Finholt@CMU-CS-C.ARPA Subject: "Finger" responses To: mkb@CMU-CS-C.ARPA, sproull@CMU-CS-C.ARPA Here is a summary of the responses to my earlier query about "finger" policy at other sites (not including the two fine responses which have already appeared here). These responses highlight two concerns. First, it appears that as the population of connected users grows the old rules (eg the Kansas Turnpike Law: use computers in a reasonable and prudent fashion) are not adequate. This is demonstrated by at least a couple of the responses that indicate that users with obvious female names are vulnerable to computer harassment. However, there does appear to be a genuine audience for features which offer some sort of dynamic information about other users. Therefore, a second concern is establishing limits for disclosure of this kind of information. At a minimum, most people seem to be against involuntary release of phone numbers and addresses. Beyond this, though, there is not much consensus. People who like open "finger" policies generally cite two reasons. First, many of them enjoy the convenience of "finger" (ie to locate friends or advisors). Second, they argue that most "finger" information is essentially public knowledge, much as a phone book listing. Also, some people mentioned that "finger" is indeed a form of diversion.: "Personally, I find 'finger' invaluable. Locally, I use it to figure out if someone (e.g. my boss, who is on the third floor while I'm in the basement) is logged in at the present time, and how long they've been idle at their terminal. Using this information, I decide whether or not to bother walking down to their office. On a network basis, I usually use 'finger' to see when the last time someone logged in (or when they last read mail, although UNIX finger usually doesn't provide this info). This is convenient if I send mail to a guy and don't get a response back -- I can figure out if he's on vacation or what-have-you." "People should be made aware that fingerable information is public. I can't believe they didn't know this already, but many users are naive. Systems probably shouldn't tell all and sundry the home addresses and telephone numbers that people are dialed in from." "I, too, frequently amuse myself at periods of low productivity by fingering random sites, particularly places I've been at or visited. I do so to see what kind of machines people have, what users are running, and whether there's anyone logged on that I know. Reading plan files is also a source of entertainment. " It appears that attitudes toward "finger" information are strongly shaped by equipment installed at a particular site or by "finger" conventions at the sites where they first began computing.: "I have always been somewhat shocked by the easy availability of finger information on tops-20 and unix systems. I started my computing career at Dartmouth where we considered privacy an important issue. The Dartmouth timesharing system originally allowed non-privileged users access to CPU time and memory size tables of the jobs currently in execution. Later, the user ID was included in the available info as well and there was a significant minority which opposed making this accessible. It would have been considered a breach of privacy to give out info on where a person was logged in or what their phone number was. Of course, the whole idea of one's personal files being readable by world as a default is even more shocking." "The PLATO system is a rather special case. The system was conceived and designed, not as a general purpose computing facility, but as a resource for offering instructional materials. It is a timesharing system. We had about 1500 terminals connected, and during 'prime time hours' we might have 600-700 terminals active, about half of which would be in use by students doing classwork and about half by teachers and other users. I think the privacy issues were strongly influenced by the fact that U of I is a public institution and must be very careful about federal guidelines. One PLATO feature was 'talk'. You could 'page' a person and talk to him using the two bottom lines of the screen. There were many busy people who DID NOT want to be disturbed by browsers who just called up to chat, so you could opt not to be included in the 'active user' list. The 'active user' list only includes ID's and not location. Many people felt that it was nobody's business where they were sitting. Furthermore, many female users who used isolated terminals felt that telling their location was a security problem. " Here is an interesting description of "fingering" in the BITNET universe: "First, on BITNET, there are very few DEC's (VAXEN, whatever) - the majority of the network is IBM and there are no 'plans' associated with an IBM account (8 charcter userid and 8 character nodename). On BITNET/EARN/NETNORTH, one sends a SMSG (Special MesSaGe) to query another node about who is logged in, how many users are logged in, what time it is there, what the node is connected up to, and a few other things - mostly trivial in nature. For a good portion of EARN (the European Advanced Research Network), requests of this kind are blocked - which is part of the reason that EARN agreed to hook up to BITNET - if it would not be subject to this kind of querying. Sure, there are ways around it - but for those countries in Europe accessible via CUNY - the command is blocked. FOr those accessible via GWU, it isn't. Still, some sites on BITNET don't allow it - they include MVS sites - but the reason they don't is because those people with userids that sound like a female (Jane_doe@Yalevm) get harrassed over the network simply because the querier recognizes that the user is female. " Several ideas were proposed to maintain the essence of "finger", without unduly compromising privacy and security: "As far as format goes, I think the only truly important parts of the finger output (for a network finger) are the person's full name, his login name, the time of last login (or 'on since'), idle time, and if he desires, his phone number. Let's face it: if I'm at Purdue and you're at CMU, it really doesn't matter to me whether you're running EMACS or whatever. Most of the processes I see on those outputs I have no idea what they are anyway, never having used TOPS-20 or whatever it is you run. On the other hand though, I personally don't object to having my current process, etc. displayed for others (UNIX finger doesn't do that though). " "Perhaps 'remote' finger should give less information than 'local' finger. I rarely need or use the phone numbers of people in Pittsburgh when I finger them from Texas. CMU distributes a digest of finger output to many sites (via the 'gloria' program.) Perhaps what we need is a global Gloria, containing the sanitized plan files of users who are interested in participating. While that only addresses the problem of the plan file, not the location information, I think the latter is secondary. " "I think it wouldn't be to hard for computers to (optionally) withhold stuff like phone numbers while letting the other stuff go all over the place. Deciding which is what is the tricky part, though... " Finally, concerns about "finger" are not new. Here are instructions for reading about an earlier finger debate which took place in 1979 on the ARPAnet: "Long ago in a network far away (The ARPANET, circa March, 1979) there was an intense dicussion of FINGER that spread to the whole network from a small beginning as a local discussion at CMU. The entire discssion transcript was recorded and archived in MSGGROUP, and it is available to you via annonymous FTP from [ECLC]msggroup.*.* along with thousands of other messages. The discussion started with message number 0794 {# 94 in file MSGGROUP.0701-0800.*}. I am not sure where the discussion ended, because it carried on for manths, and became interspersed with other topics. So, I leave it to you to sift through the transcript if you are interested. You might find it useful to wear heat resistant glasses for your reading. Lots of flames. " Tom Finholt ------------------------------ Date: 10 Jul 85 16:42:28 PDT (Wednesday) From: Hoffman.ES@Xerox.ARPA Subject: Computer-Mediated Communication "Affect in Computer-Mediated Communication: An Experiment in Synchronous Terminal-to-Terminal Discussion" by S. Kiesler, D. Zubrow, A. M. Moses (all of CMU) and V. Geller (of AT&T), in 'Human-Computer Interaction', Vol. 1, No. 1, 1985, pages 77-104. Abstract: With the spread of computer networks, communication via computer conferences, electronic mail, and computer bulletin boards will become more common in society, but little is known about the social psychological implications of these technologies. One possibility is a change in physiological arousal, feelings, and expressive behavior -- that is, affect. These computer-mediated communication technologies focus attention on the message, transmit social information poorly, and do not have a well-developed social etiquette. Therefore, these technologies might be associated with less attention to others, less social feedback, and depersonalization of the communciation setting. In the present study we examined what would happen to feelings and interpersonal behavior in an experiment in which two people met for the first time and discussed a series of questions in order to get to know one another. We measured physiological arousal (pulse and palmar sweat), subjective affect (emotional state and evaluations), and expressive behavior (self-disclosure and uninhibited behavior) in both synchronous computer-mediated and face-to-face discussions. (For comparison purposes, we also examined these effects under high- and low-evaluation anxiety.) Communicating by computer did not influence physiological arousal, and it did not change emotions or self-evaluations. However, people who communicated by computer evaluated each other less favorably than did people who communicated face-to-face, they felt and acted as though the setting was more impersonal, and their behavior was more uninhibited. These findings suggest that computer-mediated communication, rather than provoking emotionality per se, elicits asocial or unregulated behavior. Of course, our data are based on a laboratory experiment using just one type of computer-mediated communication, but the results are generally consistent with anecdotal evidence and new field research on how people use computers to communicate in organizations. ------------------------------ Date: Mon 24 Jun 85 14:16:53-PDT From: Mark Richer Subject: new AI in education mail list There seemed to be enough interest to create a mailing list on artificial intelligence in education. If there are several people at one site that are interested, try to form a local distribution system. Here's the description: AI-ED@SUMEX-AIM Discussions related to the application of artificial intelligence to education. This includes material on intelligent computer assisted instruction (ICAI) or intelligent tutoring systems (ITS), interactive encyclopedias, intelligent information retrieval for educational purposes, and pychological and cognitive science models of learning, problem solving, and teaching that can be applied to education. Issues related to teaching AI are welcome. Topics may also include evaluation of tutoring systems, commercialization of AI based instructional systems, description of actual use of an ITS in a classroom setting, user-modeling, intelligent user-interfaces, and the use of graphics or videodisk in ICAI. Announcements of books, papers, conferences, new products, public domain software tools, etc. are encouraged. Archives of messages are kept on SUMEX-AIM in: AI-ED.TXT All requests to be added to or deleted from these lists, problems, questions, etc., should be sent to AI-Ed-Request@SUMEX-AIM Coordinator: Mark Richer ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #24 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-07-21 04:07:08 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Sunday, 21 Jul 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 24 Today's Topics: Query - Publishing via Networks, Response to Query - References on Graphic User Interfaces, Announcements - Security Mailing List & The Report Store & Call for Papers Vldb86 & Planning a New Bboard ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 18-Jul-85 23:35 PDT From: William Daul / McDonnell-Douglas / APD-ASD Subject: Publishing Query To: info-law@sri-csl.arpa I have a question about publishing material accumulated via networks. Does anyone have any suggestion as to how to find out what is public domain? Here are the facts: I have been accumulating 700+ pages of recipies from a un-named network. Some of these might be from copywrited sources...I don't know. What guidelines might I follow? Any comments from the readership would be appreciated. --Bi\\ ------------------------------ Date: Thu 18 Jul 85 11:51:05-PDT From: Mark Richer Subject: Re: QUERRY references on graphic user interfaces To: mikes@AMES-NAS.ARPA W.R.T. my query for references on graphic user interfaces please mail everything to me unless you have good reason to broadcast more generally. If I get something substantial together, I'll announce it and make it available on the net (either you can ftp it or I'll email it to you). I did not make a DIALOG search; I don't have ready access to it. I guess I am being a little old fashioned, but I believe I can get a better list of important references from people more easily. But the results of any electronic search are appreciated. You can mail to me as a msg. or thru US Mail : mark richer, stanford university, knowledge systems laboratory, 701 Welch Road, Bldg. C, Stanford CA 94304. The PROTEAN project at Stanford has an iris not far from my desk, but they are using it as an output device linked to a XEROX 1108 and a Vax and do not have window software for the IRIS now. mark ------------------------------ Date: 17 Jul 85 03:36:49 EDT From: *Hobbit* Subject: New Mailing List After some footwork, the Security mailing list has been created. Its incoming address is Security@Rutgers, and is moderated by me. The incoming stuff is not digestified, but it is filtered to keep things of questionable legality/ content from escaping out to the network. This list supports the standard Arpanet -request address convention as well. Knowledge of locks and things generally runs fairly high among hackers, as I'm sure most of us know. Part of the security business is that there must be some people knowledgeable enough to defeat and subsequently repair security devices in the event of problems. Unfortunately there are also those who posess this knowledge and use it to commit crimes. And there is a third category, the hackers. These are the people who often tread a thin edge between crime and knowledge. Because of this, the discussion of security is often a ticklish issue. Unfortunately the word ''hacker'' has been misused by the media and now is shrouded in a criminal context in minds everywhere. There are quite often hackers who started out as ''crackers'' in high school, perhaps, or fell in with a bunch of destructive types but eventually learned that Hacking is a lot more fun than Cracking, involves the same sort of cleverness, and is legal to boot. It is this kind of hacking that this list deals with, in the field of security in general, be it electronic, physical, or computer-related. Therefore, this list is designed to provide a forum for discussion of any and all security topics. Since the original idea was to name this list Locksmiths@Rutgers, discussions about physical security and hardware are welcomed, but to broaden out into computer security and electronic access control and such is also valid. In other words, any subject matter relating to the *improvement* and *implementation* of security systems is okay, while how to *defeat* them is not. A good example is the already well-established list called Telecom, which is devoted to the discussion of telephone networks, hardware, and company happenings. It is not a phreak bboard where everyone calls in and leaves MCI access numbers and such. There are many other things that one can discuss about the telephone network that has no relation to toll fraud at all, like ESS internals, what LATAs are, and new products on the market. The same idea applies to the security business. Articles containing information like ''How to trivially open Kwikset locksets'' could be used for criminal purposes and would not be forwarded to the list, but info about how to take them apart and fix them is legitimately useful and would not really be questioned. It is hoped that the list will collect some legal wizards who can help the rest of us determine just where those fine lines lie, so that we can host some deeply technical discussions without violating the law or common sense. At any rate, it's off and rolling. Please forward questions and such about the list itself [additions, bugs, etc] to SECURITY-REQUEST@RUTGERS. _H* ------------------------------ Date: 19-Jul-85 00:24 PDT From: William Daul / McDonnell-Douglas / APD-ASD From: Subject: THE REPORT STORE I don't know if I mentioned this organization. I am on the mailing list for The Report Store. I will include the description that they supply with their catalogue. "THE REPORT & CATALOGUE is published quarterly for clients and customers of THE REPORT STORE, a division of Ergosyst Associates, Inc., a multidisciplinary information management firm. THE REPORT STORE monitors literature relevant to the design and use of advanced computer technologies. It provides a convenient resource for the scientific community to discover and obtain documents related to computer system use and design. Titles include books, collections, government and corporate technical research reports, proceedings, reference works, journal special issues, and references published by THE REPORT STORE. ISSN 0883-5918" THE REPORT STORE 910 Massachusetts St., Suite 503J Lawrence, Kansas 66044-2975 Telephone: 913 842 7348 --Bi\\ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Jul 85 15:42:18 jst From: ihnp4!kddlab!takeda%seismo.CSS.GOV@Berkeley (Manabu Takeda) Subject: CALL FOR PAPER VLDB86 CALL FOR PAPERS 12th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases KYOTO, JAPAN August 25-28, 1986 THE CONFERENCE VLDB Conferences are intended to identify and encourage research, development and applications of database systems. The Twelfth VLDB Conference will bring together researchers and practitioners to exchange ideas. We are eager for papers on new concepts, new ideas and new research results having to do with databases and knowledge bases. We not only solicit, but seek and encourage papers describing work in which an implemented system embodies a new concept. All submitted papers will be read by the Program Committee. TOPICS Major topics of interest include, but are not limited to: Data Models Database Theory Database Design Methodology and Tools Distributed Databases Query Optimization Concurrency Control User Interfaces Database Hardware Data Organization Performance Security Integration of Logic and Database Knowledge-Base Systems Object-Model Representation Engineering Databases Office Information Systems Multi -media Databases July 15, 1985 - 2 - TO SUBMIT YOUR PAPERS Five copies of double-spaced manuscript in English up to 5000 words should be submitted by February 15,1986 to one of the Program Committee Chairpersons. Setsuo Ohsuga University of Tokyo 4-6-1,Komaba,Meguro-ku Tokyo 153 Japan Wesley Chu Computer Science Dept. UCLA Los Angeles,CA 90024 USA Georges Gardarin INRIA Domaine de Voluceau Rocquencourt B.P. 105-78153 Le Chesnay Cedex France IMPORTANT DATES PAPERS DUE : February 15,1986 NOTIFICATION OF ACCEPTANCE : April 30,1986 CAMERA READY COPIES DUE : May 30,1986 Honourable Chairperson Dr. Tosio Kitagawa Fujitsu, JAPAN General Conference Chairperson Prof. Yutaka Ohno KYOTO University, JAPAN Steering Committee Co-Chairpersons Prof. S.Bing Yao Maryland University, USA Dr. Vincent Lum IBM, West Germany July 15, 1985 - 3 - Far East Conference Chairperson Prof. Shixuan Sa People's University of China, China American Conference Chairperson Dr. Eugene Lowenthal NCC,USA European Conference Chairperson Prof. G.Schlateter Hagen University, West Germany Japanese Executive Committee Chairperson Prof. Hirotaka Sakai Kyoto Sangyo University, Japan PROGRAM COMMITTEE FAR EAST COMMITTEE: Setsuo Ohsuga, Chairperson University of Tokyo, Japan Setsuo Arikawa Kyushu University, Japan Hiroshi Arisawa Yokohama national University, Japan C.C. Chang National Chung Hsing University, Taiwan Koichi Furukawa ICOT, Japan Ryosuke Hotaka University of Tsukuba, Japan Yahiko Kambayashi Kyushu University, Japan July 15, 1985 - 4 - Sukho Lee Seoul National University, Korea Leszek Maciaszek University of Wollongong, Australia Yoshifumi Masunaga University of Library & Information Science, Japan Takao Miura Mitsui Engineering & Shipbuilding, Japan T. V. Prabhakan Indian Institute of Technology, India Chen Qiming National Bureau of Surveying & Mapping of China, China K. P. Tan National University of Singapore, Singapore Syusuke Uemura Electrotechnical Laboratory, Japan AMERICAN COMMITTEE: Wesley Chu, Chairperson UCLA, USA P. Bruce Berra Syracuse University, USA Robert Brown Hughes Aircraft, USA Arvola Chan Computer Corporation of America, USA July 15, 1985 - 5 - Dan Fishman Hewlett-Packard Labs., USA Antonio Furtado Pontificia Universidade Catolica, Brazil Alan R. Hevner University of Maryland, USA David Hsiao U.S. Naval Postgraduate School, USA Fred Lochovsky University of Toronto, Canada Guy Lohman IBM Research Laboratory, USA Hector Garcia Molina Princeton University, USA Frank Olken Lawrence Berkeley Lab., USA Kamran Parsaye Intelliware, USA Kenneth C. Sevcik University of Toronto, Canada Arie Soshani Lawrence Berkely Lab., USA Toby Teorey University of Michigan, USA Gio Wiederhold Stanford University, USA EUROPEAN COMMITTEE: July 15, 1985 - 6 - Georges Gardarin, Chairperson INRIA, France Michel Adiba Universite de Grenoble, France Peter M. G. Apers Vrije Universiteit, The Netherlands Janis Bubenko University of Stockholm, Sweden Stefano Ceri Politecnico di Milano, Italy Peter Dadam IBM, West Germany Mishbah S. Deen University of Aberdeen, UK Robert Demolombe Onera-Cert-Deri, France Peter J. H. King Birbeck College (Univ. of London), UK Alain Pirotte Philips & Mble Ass. Research Laboratory, Belgium Joachim W. Schmidt University of Frankfurt, West Germany Michiel Scholl INRIA, France Fabio Schreiber Universita Degli Studi di Parma, Italy July 15, 1985 - 7 - Heinz Schweppe Siemens Ag, West Germany Constantino Thanos IEI/CNR, Italy Herbert Weber University of Dortmund, West Germany Advisor Toshiyasu L. Kunii University of Tokyo, Japan Local Arrangement Committee Co-Chairpersons Kiyoshi Agusa Kyoto University, Japan Takao Miura Mitsui Engineering & Shipbuilding, Japan Chief Proceedings Editor Yahiko Kambayashi Kyushu University, Japan Publicity Committee Chairperson Yoshioki Ishii Software AG of Far East, Japan Treasurer Committee Chairperson Yoshikazu Tezuka Osaka University, Japan Tutorial Committee Chairperson Isamu Kobayashi Sanno Institute of Business Adminisrtation,Japan July 15, 1985 - 8 - SPONSORS: Very Large Data Base Endowment IFIP INRIA Information Processing Society of Japan July 15, 1985 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Jul 85 14:10:38 EDT From: Smith@UDel-Dewey.ARPA Subject: Planning a new bboard... Hi all! Forgive me for intruding on your bulletin boards.... I am interested in starting up a new bulletin board for those people who are participating in, or are interested in participating in a community band (as in wind ensemble). There seems to be a real upsurge of them in the Delaware Valley, and maybe it is more widespread than that. I am hoping that we can exchange ideas and comments on good and bad arrangements, fund raising ideas, organizational problems, etc. If you are interested in seeing something like this, please send me mail -- if I don't hear from enough people this bulletin board will never be! I am: (ARPANET): smith@UDel-dewey.ARPA (CSNET): smith@UDel-dewey@csnet-relay (UUCP): ...!harvard!smith@udel-dewey -art smith ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #25 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-08-03 18:41:56 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Saturday, 3 Aug 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 25 Today's Topics: Query - Ted Nelson and Xanadu, Response to Query - Publishing Net Messages, Computers and the Law - The "Plainfield 7" (3 msgs) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 26 Jul 85 12:03:32 EDT From: Michael_D'Alessandro%Wayne-MTS%UMich-MTS.Mailnet@MIT-MULTICS.ARP From: A Subject: Ted Nelson and Project Xanadu: Where are they now? Can anyone out there tell me what Ted Nelson is up to now, and what is the status of his Xanadu Hypertext Network? Michael D'Alessandro <>: MPD%Wayne-MTS%UMich-MTS.Mailnet@MIT-Multics.ARPA <>: ...ihnp4!ucbvax!MPD%Wayne-MTS%UMich-MTS.Mailnet@MIT-Multics.ARPA ------------------------------ Date: Sun 21 Jul 85 15:51:15-CDT From: Werner Uhrig Subject: Re: Publishing Query To: WBD.TYM@OFFICE-2.ARPA I think the best approach would be to forget it. it would only raise questions better not raised and result in answers and other possible consequences, probably detrimental to the "relaxed" atmosphere in the area of copyrighted materials. In regards to my contributions to the net, I either have indicated sources, which, in all likelihood, may not regard even my posting as proper, or, if asked, would not consider favorably a request to allow someone else to use their efforts in a profit-making venture. And if I ever made any "original" contributions to the net which anyone may consider useful in a "profitable" enterprise, I would, of course, be flattered by that, but would like you to consider that I (and many others) contribute here in the spirit of cooperative, non-profit atmosphere I perceive to exist on the electronic bulletin-board systems and would like the world of "profit" to stay as far removed as possible from them. Given that I don't know if I ever preserved any legal rights to my public mumblings, and don't really care to do the necessary legal voodoo that has the proper effect, it occurs to me that what's needed, is a statement of some kind, which, in effect, creates some kind of "blanket cover" for everything posted, making it unnecessary that each individual message has to have "voodoo". Any "legal eagles" out there, that can achieve that with a swift stroke of the (ahem) .... keyboard (and mouse (-: ) ??? Something in effect guaranteeing that everything is protected from being used *FOR PROFIT* by anyone else but the author himself (if he so desires *AND* really has the legal rights to it, anyway). If, at the same time, it can be made clear that anything posted is the sole responsibility of the poster, and not anyone else cooperating in maintaining the communication-channels, that would be fantastic - but then, of course, I am under the distinct impression, that a couple of hundred lawyers are going to make a good living of studying that legal "snake-pit" ..., sighhhhh ... Cheers, Werner ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21-Jul-85 09:13:30 PDT From: vortex!lauren@rand-unix (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: press conferences While it is unfortunate when authorities get "heavy-handed" about the way they handle such things, I don't believe that there is any requirement that the general public be allowed to attend press briefings/conferences. Many (if not most) such events are limited to accredited press members--that's part of what press credentials are all about. You think that just anyone off the street can walk into any old State Dept. press conference? No way. Such events would just turn into giant shouting matches if such were allowed. Press conferences are not "public" events in the normal sense--they are "invited" events. Now, if a properly accredited press person were denied access to a press conference without good reason, that would be a different matter entirely. --- On the subject of the NJ BBS case... recent information indicates that at least some of the involved BBS's were being used to pass around information on stolen phone and non-phone credit cards. Freedom of speech is not absolute--and starts to get complicated when behaviors can be viewed as "aiding and abetting" in the commission of a crime. Given that some BBS operators are probably truly ignorant of some of the material people are publicly posting on their boards, it still presents a substantial problem. What if someone started posting lists of when people were away from their homes, so that they could be easily robbed? Such behavior would almost certainly be viewed as something on the order of conspiracy to commit a crime. The BBS operators really only have two choices to protect themselves in the long run (assuming we're talking about honest ones). 1) They can pass, as moderators, on public messages before allowing them to be publicly displayed. 2) They can keep verified information regarding the name, address, etc. of each submitter to their system. Such information need not be publicly available or even used on messages--it should just be around so that people who post such messages can be held accountable for their messages. I predict that unless actions like these are taken, very restrictive laws will be passed to control what is perceived as a growing BBS problem. The right to *anonymous* freedom of speech is not absolute, and I'm convinced that such BBS-related laws could be framed and enacted in manners that would be ultimately upheld in court. Perhaps voluntary actions on the part of honest BBS operators can still help to make such laws unnecessary. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: 22 Jul 85 20:05:59 EDT From: AWALKER@RUTGERS.ARPA Subject: Bletch!! To: "Inquiring Minds Reject Cruft Like This": ; Reply-To: AWalker@RUTGERS.ARPA [From the Star-Ledger, Sunday 21-Jul-85, section 1 page 12, forwarded without any associated red tape.] Genius or mania, firms fear compter 'hacking' by KITTA MacPHERSON They have been painted as the newest darlings of our technology-driven era, beating computers at their own game with their brilliance. They have also been depicted as teenages social outcasts on some kind of weird power trip, manipulating computer data banks out of pure malice. But to those who know these young computer "hackers", or "crackers" as the "straight" computer hobbyists prefer to call them, they are probably a little bit of both. No one yet knows whether the charges are true against New Jersey's "Computer Seven", a group of teenaged boys arrested by South Plainfield police last week for allegedly using their computers to steal telephone services and get stolen credit card numbers to buy merchandise. But the mere possibility that they may be -- that satellites relaying long- distance telephone calls were reprogrammed, that defense department computers were penetrated and that stolen credit card numbers were openly exchanged -- is sending shock waves through the business community and forcing some if its members to reevaulate the security measures of their databases. "The personal computer is invading corporate America and they don't understand it," said 28-year-old Ian Murphy, alias "Captain Zap", an avowed hacker-turned- computer security expert living in Pennsylvania. "I have a single-spaced, typed list of major corporations, newspapers, banks, you name it, and the dial-up numbers of their computers. What it comes down to is that most of these companies have systems that are actually accessible and they don't believe it." But some see a deeper issue. "The real issue is not lack of security," said David Gould, the president of MicroFrame, Inc., a computer security firm in New Brunswick. "The real issue is that there is no way in the world that we can close off our data bases. The nature of information is dissemination and we, as a society, have decided that information shall be available." When systems are penetrated, the hacker may be a voyeur, just looking to see what is there and then mysteriously signing his computer alias. One systems manager of a large corporation in New Jersey said that when he logs on to his system in the morning he always finds a message from "Moonraker" who has been in and out of the system during the night. Hackers may enter a system for private gain, perhaps altering a bill or maliciously charging it to the account of an enemy. With thousands of entries in a system, data managers find it difficult to catch a slight change in the records. Although hackers are often portrayed as lonely geniuses, Murphy and the others contend that breaking into private data systems is child's play. For equipment, you need a computer, a modem which connects two computers by telephone and a program which will make successive phone calls. This program, known as the "demon dialer", can be set up to call every variation of a four-digit telephone number in a given telephone exchange. When it connects with another computer during a phone call -- it will know this when the receiver at the other end answers with a long "beep" tone -- it will make a notation on its printout. Now what the hacker sees as the challenge of it all begins. He calls the computer discovered through the search and begins to guess passwords. Impossible, right? Wrong. "Almost everything about computers is logical, that's what we're always taught," said a systems manager at an Essex County firm. "But passwords are the exception. People are completely emotional about it. They use their wives' or childrens' names, something very personal. Or they are very obvious about it like someone at a hospital using the word 'nurse'." Of course, it is also always helpful to have friends on the inside of a company who can tell you a bit about the person who conjured up a password giving access to high-level files. Or he can read off the password -- often taped on an index card to computer terminals or on a nearby desk. The trash can has been known to help. "I can know everything about a company in two or three nights of 'trashing'," said Murphy, whose 1981 arrest by FBI agents for hacking was one of the first ever in the country. "There is more information in trash cans. And these companies -- if they knew, they would say 'Oh my Gosh!'" Most officials in charge of security at firms say they are faced with a paradox. Companies want systems that are both secure and easily accessible to employees. "It's the old 'user-friendly' problem," said George Lane, director of planning for Datapro Research Corp. in Delran, which advises clients on security management. "People have trouble remembering their passwords. And if you make it too complicated, they will write it down somewhere nearby for help, or it may just take too long to get in the system." Even if companies work at developing intricate passwords, one leak can doom the integrity of the system. This is because of the existence of computer bulletin boards -- a computer equipped to answer the telephone and exchange messages with other computers. Commercial bulletin boards, operated by firms like Dow Jones and CompuServe, charge a fee for their use. But there are thousands of private bulletin boards operated by a hobbyist for a particular community, for example, users of a particular brand of computer. It is within these systems that "pirate boards" -- bulletin boards dedicated to distributing passwords, methods for breaking into private data systems and stolen credit card numbers -- proliferate. "I have seen just tons of stolen credit card numbers on some of these boards," said a 17-year-old Dover youth who was one of those arrested as the "Computer Seven". "They are traded like baseball cards." The youth operated a bulletin board called "Private Sector" out of his home for computer hobbyists interested in telecommunications and following developments in telephone companies in the post-divestiture environment. "To my knowledge, I didn't have anything illegal in my bulletin board," he said, adding that if he found anything illegal during his nightly scans of the system, he would delete it. Police were led to the youth after finding his bulletin board phone number in the computer file of another of the arrested youths. Law enforcement officials say it is difficult to pinpoint how many hackers there may be in the country. But at least 10 million Americans have purchased personal computers since the beginning of the computer explosion during the mid-seventies and 10 percent of the owners are believed to own modems. Hackers don't necessarily have to be rich -- the price of personal computers has dropped substantially since their introduction. But most experts agree that hackers have to have a lot of time on their hands to explore the hundreds of bulletin boards available and make the kind of repetitious searches necessary to data break-ins. Alienated teenagers often fit that bill. "Computers have a real attraction for people who have problems dealing with people," said Jonathan Rotenberg, the 22-year-old president of the Boston Computer Society, the nation's largest computer user group. "It provides a powerful kind of escape because the computer gives you immediate approval when people may not. It's an ideal companion and people get more and more isolated and get wrapped up in the world of bits and bytes." Rotenberg, a former "addict" himself, believes the act of hacking provides a feeling of control that other activities may not offer. "There is a real sense of power in doing something really impressive like breaking into a certain data bank," Rotenberg said. "It excites people who probably haven't been particularly successful in other things in their lives." Murphy started fooling around with his Apple ][ in 1973. "I had been through model rockets and ham radio so it was the next thing in scientific curiosity," said Murphy, who was sentenced to two and a half years probation and a $1000 fine for stealing about $300,000 in phone services. But the spreading use of easily accessed computer systems has created an almost irresistible opportunity for experimentation for some of the hackers. "I think in most cases these are people who have no intention of bringing about great harm," Rotenberg said. "It's just an incredibly exciting puzzle for them to break." Law enforcement officials fume over this view because this computer curiosity almost inevitably leads to theft. "A lot of time spent on computer bulletin boards which is done over phone lines can often cost a lot of money," said a systems manager for a university- run computer department in the state. "So, the first thing you have to do is break the phone company." First there were the "blue boxes" in the early 1970's, illegally constructed devices which mimicked the set of tones that directs a phone call into the long-distance network. AT&T engineers have since defeated the technology. But there are new tricks, which are keeping security managers hopping. "Our switching system is one gigantic computer, which is generally a closed system and we do build in security measures," said Neal Norman, district manager for corporate security for AT&T Communications in Basking Ridge. "But we have to maintain a certain degree of openness for customers. If we make it so secure our customers can't use it, we'll be out of business." AT&T scientists have developed a system which can tell the difference between real tones and blue-box generated ones. But this has meant that hackers have gravitated toward an easier method of fraud -- using stolen telephone credit card numbers. Norman said a customer education program has been started warning credit card users to memorize their number and not carry it around with them, not to write it down on scraps of paper or on the walls of a phone booth, and be careful who may be listening if an operator asks for a recitation of the number in a public place. The problem of computer hackers attempting to misuse telephone facilities is a growing one. But Norman said that efforts by his company and other firms through the newly created Communication Fraud Control Association may be controlling efforts at a certain level. Telecommunications companies are not the only ones fighting back. Hosts of small companies providing equipment and advice to secure data systems are growing. Whatever man does, man can undo," said MicroFrame's Gould. What we've done is we've taken the security requirements of today and we've introduced sophisticated hardware technology that seems to solve the problem." But Gould admits that the persistence of hackers may make the process an endless one. "The problem is society has made a very conscious decision to allow information to be disseminated at a massive level," Gould said. "Our only alternative may be to get into this leapfrog game where we have to strive to constantly stay ahead." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Jul 85 11:35 EST From: thompson%umass-cs.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa With regard to the problem of credit card carbons, I see two possible solutions, one short term and one long term, to prevent people from getting your number. Short Term: Simply ask for the carbons from any transaction you make. You can then render them unreadable yourself. Perhaps, if you explain to the proprietor why you want them, he won't be suspicious (assuming of course she is). Long Term: Use carbonless forms, if these will work in credit card machines. I don't see why they wouldn't. Roger Thompson Thompson@Umass ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA (human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #26 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-09-02 23:08:59 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Sunday, 11 Aug 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 26 Today's Topics: Computers and the Law - Phone Breaking & Carbonless Forms for Credit Cards (2 msgs), Computer Networks - DOD BBS Tracks Export Licenses, Announcements - Forum on Risks to the Public & Call for papers: OIS-86 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue 6 Aug 85 11:22:16-EDT From: Wang Zeep The problem with phone hacking is that one can get free calls anywhere in the country with a power drill and a carbide bit (and a payphone). I haven't seen anybody in the press decrying home hobbyists who own carbide-tipped drill bits, or complaining about hardware stores that sell them. [No, I will not tell you how to drill phones.] wz ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Aug 85 17:09 MST From: DPickett@HIS-PHOENIX-MULTICS.ARPA Subject: Computers and the Law From: David Pickett, Honeywell System M (Multics), Phoenix. The telephone credit card has long been the security farce of the nation. Mine carries the "secret" number in large, easily readable indelible credit card lettering on the face. When the installation of phones with magnetic readers begins, you will have to flash this beauty in all sorts of public places. They will start the installations where they have the most solidly established pattern of fraud, so as to ensure the maximum number of hungry eyes. Then, hungry eyes can take your number to those places where the surveillence is minimum, places that coincidentally didn't get the magnetic readers yet. Perhaps the readers will be small enough so that we can cut the card into two parts, one with the number to hide/burn/whatever, and one with the magnetic stripe and signature (so that you can prove ownership, if necessary). And will the "transition" be over in our lifetimes? In a related note, only Sunoco has had the foresight to get rid of carbons so far as I can see. But the right way will probably be the use of non-unaided-human readable credit identity on the card only. Mobil is using the stripe in preference to the imprint, but my stripes live about 2 months despite special care. ------------------------------ From: tanner <@csnet-relay.arpa,@ucf.CSNET:tanner@ki4pv.uucp> Subject: Carbonless Forms for Credit Cards (vol 8 iss 25) Date: Wed Aug 7 20:26:40 1985 Just yesterday, I ran across these things. If they are here in the booming metropolis of DeLand today, they'll most likely be in your city sometime early next week. tanner andrews, systems ...{decvax|akgua}!ucf-cs!ki4pv!tanner === ------------------------------ Date: 9-Aug-85 12:15 PDT From: William Daul / McDonnell-Douglas / APD-ASD Subject: Bulletin Board Tracks Delayed Export Licenses To: DIA.TYM@OFFICE-2, ATE.TYM@OFFICE-2, WJE.TYM@OFFICE-2 To: SGK.TYM@OFFICE-2,MARKET.TYM@OFFICE-2 From: MINI-MICRO SYSTEMS/August 1985 pg. 24 The Department of Defense has initiated an electronic bulletin board to help exporters track their export licenses by telephone. Called the Export License Status Adcisor (ELISA), the service can be used to check the progress of export license applications that have been referred from the Department of Commerce to the DOD for review. ELISA's phone number is (202) 697-6109. ------------------------------ Date: Thu 1 Aug 85 15:56:07-PDT From: Peter G. Neumann Subject: Forum on Risks to the Public in Computer Systems There is a new on-line forum on Risks to the Public in the Use of Computer Systems. It will be refereed sufficiently to ensure only constructive discussion on that subject. The aims are stated in the first issue, dated 1 Aug 85. Bug your system gurus to set up a BBOARD service (e.g., RISKS.TXT) and/or a local forwarding service, and have them inform RISKS-REQUEST@SRI-CSL. Contributions to RISKS@SRI-CSL. Back issues will be available on SRI-CSL.ARPA under RISKS-vol.no, where "vol" and "no" are the volume and number. Thus, Volume 1 No 1 may be FTPed from RISKS-1.1, but please set up local services if there are more than a few readers on your system to avoid transmission of many private copies on the network. The coordinator is Peter G. Neumann . PGN NIC: MESSAGE: RISKS@SRI-CSL "RISKS" is a distribution list for discussion of issues related to risks to the public in the use of computer systems. It has sponsorship of the ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy (Chaired by Peter G. Neumann), but is open to everyone. Contributions are welcome on a wide range of relevant topics bearing on the stated subject. Contributors are requested to avoid overt political statements, personal attacks, flames, etc. Inappropriate submissions will be rejected. Back issues may be FTPed from SRI-CSL files RISKS-vol.no where "vol" and "no" are volume and number. Risks-1.1 was issued 1 Aug 85. All requests to be added to or deleted from this list, problems, questions, etc., should be sent to RISKS-REQUEST@SRI-CSL. Adding a BBOARD address is preferable to individual net addresses, to keep net traffic down. Coordinator: Peter G. Neumann Peter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Aug 85 02:50 EDT From: Carl Hewitt Subject: Call for papers: OIS-86 ****************************************************** * CALL FOR PAPERS * * * * THIRD ACM CONFERENCE ON * * OFFICE INFORMATION SYSTEMS: OIS-86 * * * * October 6-8, 1986 * * Biltmore Plaza Hotel * * Providence, RI * ****************************************************** General Chair: Carl Hewitt, Program Chair: Stanley Zdonik, MIT Brown University Treasurer: Gerald Barber, Local Arrangements: Andrea Skarra, Gold Hill Computers Brown University An interdisciplinary conference on issues relating to office information systems sponsored by ACM/SIGOA in cooperation with Brown University and the MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. Submissions from the following fields are solicited: Anthropology Artificial Intelligence Cognitive Science Computer Science Economics Management Science Psychology Sociology Topics appropriate for this conference include (but are not restricted to) the following: Technologies including Display, Voice, Telecommunications, Print, etc. Human Interfaces Deployment and Evaluation System Design and Construction Goals and Values Knowledge Bases and Reasoning Distributed Services and Applications Indicators and Models Needs and Organizational Factors Impact of Computer Integrated Manufacturing Unpublished papers of up to 5000 words (20 double-spaced pages) are sought. The first page of each paper must include the following information: title, the author's name, affiliations, complete mailing address, telephone number and electronic mail address where applicable, a maximum 150-words abstract of the paper, and up to five keywords (important for the correct classification of the paper). If there are multiple authors, please indicate who will present the paper at OIS-86 if the paper is accepted. Proceeedings will be distributed at the conference and will later be available from ACM. Selected papers will be published in the ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems. Please send eight (8) copies of the paper to: Prof. Stan Zdonick OIS-86 Program Chair Computer Science Department Brown University P.O. Box 1910 Providence, RI 02912 DIRECT INQUIRIES TO: Rita Desormeau (401) 863-3302 ********************************************************************* IMPORTANT DATES Deadline for Paper Submission: February 1, 1986 Notification of Acceptance: April 30, 1986 Deadline for Final Camera-Ready Copy: July 1, 1986 Conference Dates: October 6-8, 1986 ***** ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: The Moderator (Human-Nets-Request@Rutgers) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #27 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-08-27 07:53:00 PST HUMAN-NETS Digest Tuesday, 27 Aug 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 27 Today's Topics: Query - Telephone/Mail networks, Computers and the Law - BBS's: New "pornography" law? & Carbonless Credit-Card Forms, Information - Quickly Computing Quarks ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 13 Aug 85 12:31 EDT From: Mills@CISL-SERVICE-MULTICS.ARPA Subject: Telephone/Mail human networks A number of the Naturist groups along the east coast have been discussing methods of better coordinating their political activites. A major problem in doing this is effective communication between the different groups. Some people have suggested e-mail as a solution, but given that few if any of the groups have any computer equipment it would seem that the initial outlay for equipment and software would be rather high. I have investigated using utilities like the Source and Compuserve, but once again price becomes a major problem. This led me to think about non-computer networks that utilize telephones and/or U.S. mail. The only such network I have heard of is the "Phone-Tree"? that the L5 society uses. (This is why I am posting this to Space as well as Human-Nets). If anyone has any info on how the L5 net works, if it realy exists, or how any other phone/mail net works I would greatly appreciate it. Any references to books/articles on how to build such a net would also be very interesting. We are talking about approximately 30 groups east of the Mississippi, mostly on the coast, with about 5 people in each group that need to contacted with each "posting". John Mills send replies to Mills at CISL-SERVICE-MULTICS.ARPA ------------------------------ Date: Mon 26 Aug 85 16:35:29-PDT From: Mark Crispin Subject: BBS's: they're at it again To: MsgGroup@BRL.ARPA Forgive me if this is old news. I just read in the 26 August issue of Computerworld that Sen. Paul S. Trible Jr. (R.-Va.) has introduced a bill (S. 1305) which would ban "pornographic" messages from computer bulletin boards. In particular, Trible wants to close down "sex talk" computer services and networks run by alleged child molesters who share information about their victims. It is hard to object to making it difficult for child molesters, but it is the other aspects of this bill which are chilling. For several years I have run a BBS which is more or less the electronic equivalent of a bathroom wall. The messages have ranged from the merely crude to the outrageous (in the positive sense), but by and large it's all in fun. There obviously is a social need for what is essentially a public graffitti board. The only run-in my BBS has ever had with the law up to now was about a year ago. A Pacific Bell investigator was looking into a case of toll fraud and wanted whatever information I could provide about a call the BBS got a few weeks prior. I didn't have much to tell the guy since my BBS allows any string for a "name" and "where calling from", but I gave him what little I had. It turned out my info verified to him that he was on the right track, he thanked me and that was the end of it. If S. 1305 passes my BBS and hundreds like it would be made illegal. It is completely unclear as to what constitutes "pornography" -- would a Planned Parenthood BBS providing information about VD be "pornographic"? Granted, my BBS is rather openly "dirty", but all the messages on it are posted by the same people who read them. I don't see who is getting harmed by it, especially since almost all of the escapades described in the messages on my BBS are anatomically impossible! The most idiotic statement I have heard is about children with modems could dial up an X-rated BBS. I wonder what parents have in their heads when they buy their kids modems. What, pray tell, do these parents think these kids are doing with their modems? Calling up BBS's is about the most innocuous thing they can do. Otherwise, they are running up bills on their parents' Visa card calling up CompuServe/Source/etc. or cracking systems they have no business being on. -- Mark -- ------------------------------ Date: 14 Aug 85 10:12:54 GMT From: jmccombie @ DCA-EUR Subject: carbonless credit-card forms They're here in Europe, too. I've seen them in a couple of places in Italy. I was rather disappointed to have NOT seen them the last time I was in London (theater tix, hotel, restaurants), nor at any airline counter yet. It's about time; I'm getting tired of having to wash my hands every time I use my credit cards (to get the carbon-paper residue in the sink rather than on my clothes). Jon ------------------------------ Date: 19-Aug-85 10:20 PDT From: William Daul / McDonnell-Douglas / APD-ASD From: Subject: Quickly Computing Quarks (Science News, VOL. 128) To: physics@sri-unix.arpa ...news of at least one IBM research effort in high-speed computing surfaced at last month's National Computer Conference in Chicago. A team of physicists will soon take over a specially built computer designed to solve a single physics problem. According to an IBM official, this computer is supposed to take less than a year to solve a provblem that would take a CRAY-1 supercomputer more than 300 years to do. The IBM machine, developed at the Thomas J. Watson Research Center in Yorktown Heights, N.Y., consists of an array of 576 processors, each one capable of 20 million "floating point" operations per second (equivalent to multiplying two decimal numbers 20 million times). In contrast, a typical personal computer performs 1,000 or so such operations per second. When all the processors are working in parallel, each one handling a small part of a computation, the IBM computer can handle more than 10 billion floating point operations per second. The machine will be used to calculate the mass of a proton from "first princilple," applying quantum chromodynamics theory. This year-long exercise should give physicists some clues as to the valididty of their concepts about quarks and gluons. Once this project is over, the machine could be used for uther purposes, says IBM's George Paul. And the computer's design team is already thinging about how to extend the ideas they developed for the original machine. ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: The Moderator (Human-Nets-Request@Rutgers) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #28 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-08-28 20:02:00 PST HUMAN-NETS Digest Wednesday, 28 Aug 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 28 Today's Topics: Computers and the Law - Police and Press Conferences & 'Pornographic' BBoards & Loss of fredom in communications (3 msgs) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 27 Aug 85 12:28:54 pdt From: reynolds@AMES-NAS.ARPA (Don Reynolds) Subject: Re: "Inquiring Minds want to know" Reply to Hobbit... Please add me to your Security@Rutgers list. I am interested in the issues of software piracy as well as encouraging "hacking" while pre- venting "cracking". Your initial message (H-Net, Volume 23, July 21) describing what I would only term "police harrassment" almost prompted me to write. But Lauren's comment (H-Net, Volume 25, August 3) did the trick. While I most often agree with Lauren, I feel the issue of "hackers" and "crackers" has another side in this instance. So to the issue in the Human-Nets message: I once attended one of Senator Proxmire's hearings. Upon entry to the open hearing (it was not a "press conference" though the press were there) the guard told me I could not take photographs without a press card. They had bright "television" lights so I would have not needed flash. That was not the issue. I suspect they wanted to know that I had a valid, professional need for the photographs, and could be tracked (if not controlled), should I take unflattering pictures. Of course, I took no pictures. Lauren must be correct that all press conferences need not be open to the general public. The Peace Officers also have the right to use force, if needed, in doing their duty. One could interpret that duty to be to keep someone from FORCING their way into the press con- ference. But did Walker do this? Unfortunately, some Peace Officers watch movies like "Dirty Harry" and "Rambo", then lapse into a distorted view of the world. It is a very easy thing to do. Those of us who don't carry a gun all day, and live many minutes being prepared to use it, find this Peace Officer disease hard to understand. But it is real. Peace Officers are aware of it. If you doubt me, as any one of them to tell you what a "John Wayne" cop is. I object to the intimidation by Officers who forget that their first name is "Peace". With 20-20 hindsight, in the comfort by my terminal, I can suggest saying to the officers, "Gentlemen, I will cooperate with you completely. But for my records I need your names and badge numbers". Then I would write them down and leave. Further actions would depend upon discussions with an attorney (the ACLU, preferably). Our local Bar Association refers people to attorneys for half-hour appointments for $20.00. I'd like to know my rights in this particular case. But the badge number request should flush the "John Wayne" out of the officers. Best, Don ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 85 09:06:09 EDT (Tuesday) Subject: Re: BBS's: they're at it again To: Mark Crispin Cc: MsgGroup@BRL.ARPA From: Dave So what if your BBS is "dirty", if people are offended by the content of the messages, then they should not bother calling again. I view this the same way I view "dirty" magazines in a book store, if you don't like that kind of magazine don't buy it. No one is forcing you to read/buy anything you don't want to. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Aug 85 09:31 EDT From: taylor.WBST@Xerox.ARPA Subject: Re: Loss of fredom in communications! To: Paul R. Grupp Cc: telcom@MIT-XX.ARPA, info-hams@SIMTEL20.ARPA [Ed. Note: This and the following 2 messages are in responce to a message that was not posted to Human-nets, describing a recent Supreme Court decision that it is illegal for people to watch sattelite TV that is intended to be a 'bought' cable service (that is, using a sattelite receiver to do so). The message was forwarded to Telecom, and Mr. Grupp (who forwarded it) added that he thought that the ruling paved the way for a ruling that might make it illegal to monitor radio signals without the sender's permission.] I WONDER WHAT THE POSITION OF THE "VOICE OF THE RADIO AMATEUR"--THE ARRL, IS ON THIS LITTLE EROSION OF FREEDOM. JIM (W2OZH) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Aug 85 9:22:32 CDT From: Will Martin -- AMXAL-RI To: taylor.WBST@Xerox.arpa Cc: Paul R. Grupp , telcom@Mit-Xx.arpa Cc: info-hams@Simtel20.arpa Subject: Re: Loss of fredom in communications! As a sidenote to this discussion, I recall running across a copy of a House bill in the government-documents-repository section of my university library (this was back in the early 60s) which was a resolution or proposed legislation that explicitly stated that "No regulation or law shall be interpreted to in any way restrict the right of any individual to receive any or all signals transmitted via the electromagnetic spectrum" (or words to that effect). However, sadly, I believe that this, one of the few worthwhile pieces of legislation I have ever read, was never passed. Too bad. If it had been, this nonsense would have never arisen. Will ------------------------------ Date: 28 Aug 1985 16:44:46-EDT From: d3unix!jhs@mitre-bedford.ARPA To: bccvax!GRUPP@MIT-MC.ARPA Cc: bccvax!telcom@MIT-XX.ARPA, bccvax!info-hams@SIMTEL20.ARPA Subject: Re: Loss of fredom in communications! Maybe it's time to start pressing for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution on this point. "No law, ordinance, regulation, or executive order shall be valid or binding if it abridges the right of a citizen to receive and gain information from radio signals from any source whatever." The manufacturers of scrambling and encryption equipment should be more than glad to put their attorneys to work polishing up the amendment into a suitable form of legalese. Likewise the manufacturers of consumer satellite dish antennas and VCRs. There are a lot of tricky issues within Government on this subject, but right now the mood is to get everybody to "button up" their communications. Therefore, stating this principle right in the Constitution would be a good way to relieve everybody of any other protection and force them to focus on encryption. The key question is whether or not the public would care enough to vote for it in a referendum. -John Sangster jhs at MITRE-Bedford ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: Charles McGrew, The Moderator (Human-Nets-Request@RED.RUTGERS.EDU) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #30 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-09-13 12:53:00 PST HUMAN-NETS Digest Friday, 13 Sep 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 30 Today's Topics: Proposal - Translation of Technical Foreign Language Material, Computers and the Law - Restrictive BBS Legislation(2 msgs)& Satellite viewing "freedoms" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: eugene@AMES-NAS.ARPA (Eugene Miya) Date: 13 Sep 1985 1209-PDT (Friday) To: AIlist@sri-ai.ARPA, soft-eng@mit-mc.ARPA Subject: Technical foreign language material Lately, there have been significant technical advances from non-English speaking countries: Japan and the Continent. How many know the Japanese equivalent to the CACM? What is the German equivalent of the IEEE? It is too easy to say that such organizations and publications are not significant. We have been accused of parochialism. Our problems in the computer industry are rather unique as colleagues in other fields such as nuclear fusion report that most of their colleagues are, for all practical purposes, forced to come to the U.S. This is not the case with computing Just as we have file servers and process servers, we have a distributed system. Our greatest resource are not the machines, but the people with special skills. To this end I propose the following: Propose: 1) to identify individuals who are capable of providing simple translation. It would help if the Universities could do this. Perhaps, Universities could get assistance from foreign language departments. 2) Identify various foreign language publications of technical interest. Quickly identify articles of wide interest. This information could be posted to general interest Usenet newsgroups such as net.research and net.mag as well as the special interest groups such as the AI List, net.lang, and so forth. We should not create news grops, but work on top of existing groups. 3) Help fund subscription and translations. Perhaps, individuals without technical translation expertise can get together to pay for technical translations [commercial], and/or help fund the subscription of those with technical translation expertise. Dymond@nbs-vms.ARPA has started an info-japan and a nihongo discussion group on the ARPAnet, but it would be difficult to get Usenet participation. I specfically do not want to create new newsgroups. This structure can be placed atop the existing new group structure. The Usenet has several advantages for the circulation of this type of material: 1) it has the links into Japan, Korea, Australia, Germany, France, and the rest of Europe not on the ARPAnet. 2) since there is no global authority, industrial companies can participate more easily. 3) There are a diversity of news groups which make news dissemination easier: net.mag for instance is used for posting the TOCs of various publications, ideal for this type of dissemination. Other significant groups include: net.ai, net.cse, net.announce, net.physics, net.arch, net.math, net.mag, net.research, net.bio, net.graphics, net.wanted, net.nlang It appears our most critical needs are in the Eastern Asian languages such as Japanese, Korean, and Chinese. Other useful work would include French, German, and the other European languages. We have to look to the Universities for much of our assistance, but private organizations and government can also help. We can certainly make inquires. The Usenet extends into Japan, France, and other non-English native countries. We must take benefit of these contributors. Similarly, we can contribute to these countries by tagging significant English language documents. I am willing to act as a clearing house for determining finding individuals and groups, and specific journals. For this purpose, I am giving my address an ARPA, uucp gateway. Send the mail inquires there. More in a couple of weeks. From the Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers: --eugene miya NASA Ames Research Center {hplabs,ihnp4,dual,hao,decwrl,allegra}!ames!amelia!eugene eugene@ames-nas ------------------------------ Date: Thu 29 Aug 85 10:54:50-PDT From: Ted Shapin Subject: Restrictive BBS Legilation FIDO is the name of a BB system that runs on the IBM-PC and unlike many other systems has automatic message routing over dial-up long-distance lines in the early AM when rates are lowest. The following discussion appeared on many FIDO systems and should be of interest. - - - - FIDONEWS -- 29 Jul 85 00:00:44 Page 4 ============================================================ NEWS ============================================================ BBSLAW01.MSG From Chip Berlet, Public Eye Magazine. HELP FIGHT BAD BBS LAWS - 01 FEDERAL LEGISLATION RESTRICTING BBS OPERATION DUE SOON! POST THIS MESSAGE ON EVERY BBS IN AMERICA! A new federal law that would outlaw some BBS systems and severely restrict all others could be passed by Congress in 1985. A mobilization of SYSOPS and BBS users is urgently needed to ensure we have a chance to speak out on the new law. Watch BBS's for messages with "BBSLAWXX.MSG" headers or "HELP FIGHT BAD BBS LAWS - XX" titles. An ad-hoc group will be posting these messages on BBS's and the commercial systems. LAWMUG SYSOP Paul Bernstein and I have learned the law could be introduced as soon as MID JULY! Although aspects of the new law have been discussed for months by "experts" in Washington, NOT ONE SYSOP WAS CONSULTED until a June 20 conference in Chicago which Paul and I attended. Vague language in another telecommunications law already introduced in Congress might also restrict BBS activities. We urged the Congressional aide involved in that legislation to exempt BBS systems until we could let SYSOPS and lawyers study the language more carefully. We must also monitor this law. The law restricting BBS operations was prompted by panic over the possibility that children (minors) might read pornographic material, and by the wave of publicity regarding the malicious hackers and illegal credit card and phone information posted on BBS's by electronic graffiti vandals. Among the ideas SERIOUSLY DISCUSSED for the new federal law restricting BBS's are provisions which would require: * Registration of all BBS's as a public utility. * BBS users to log in with, and post their legal names. * SYSOPS to keep a log of all names of users. * SYSOPS to keep a log of all messages & access times. * Criminal penalties for SYSOPS whose BBS's have illegal messages posted on them - even if the SYSOP was not aware of the message and had not been informed the message was there nor given a chance to remove it! While the law is currently only being discussed, there is much pressure to restrict and regulate BBS's. A good BBS law could protect BBS's and SYSOPS. A bad law could destroy BBS's in their infancy as a telecommunications phenomena. BBS's put the individual back into mass society in the age of telecommunications. BBS's encourage information sharing and remove barriers to discussion posed by social status, wealth, class, race, sex, physical size, and many physical handicaps. BBS's encourage the democratic process and are a powerful new communications system which deserves Constitutional protection and First Amendment Rights. NO LEGISLATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION! There will be differing views of wording, law, and tactics; all should be given a chance to be heard. Congress should delay passage of any BBS legislation until BBS users and SYSOPS have a chance to discuss the legal issues and make their opinions known in a series of Congressional hearings. Our discussion must start immediately and we must organize to block bad BBS legislation until our voices are heard. We share the responsibility. Time is short. Spread the word. It is the electronic age. We are all Paul Revere.... FIDONEWS -- 19 Aug 85 00:02:15 Page 9 How FidoNet Can Help Fight Against Federal Legislation Restricting BBS Operation After reading the article in the July 29th issue of FidoNews by Chip Berlet on the new federal computer laws being proposed I decided to follow up and see how we could pool our resources in order to support the efforts of those individuals or groups that represent the majority of our bona fide BBS users and sysops. The only formal group that I found was the National Association of Bulletin Board Operators started by Chicago attorney Paul Bernstein who also runs a BBS for lawyers called LAWMUG. This is a relatively new group that currently includes Paul and a number of other Chicago residents. They are against federal efforts restricting bulletin boards and are currently soliciting support via messages on several bulletin boards, as well as the Source. If you would like more information or would like to send contributions their address is: National Association of Bulletin Board Operators c/o Paul Bernstein 600 N. McClurg Ct. Chicago, Ill. 60611 I also contacted the office of Senator Paul Tribble and was sent a copy of Senate Bill 1305. For those of you that may not be familiar this is a Bill to "establish criminal penalties for the transmission by computer of obscene matter, or by computer or by other means, of matter pertaining to the sexual exploitation of children, and for other purposes". Exchanging information pertaining to sexual crimes is not prohibited under current law. The problem with this Bill is that it doesn't stop there. Quoting from the Bill "any obscene, lewd, lascivious, or filthy writing, description, picture, or other matter entered, stored, or transmitted by or in a computer" will constitute a crime. I'm no lawyer, but I'm certainly not in favor of governmental efforts that force me to ensure that nothing illegal occurs on my system. With Fido we have all the checks and balences to keep our boards clean without intervention. The ACLU opposes the Bill because it infringes on First Admendment rights. I would like to hear the opinion of others on this matter as I may be asked to testify on some of the positive aspects of bulletin boards. (Fido in particular). The hearings are scheduled for late September or early October. If you would like to comment or know more about this matter you can contact: Paul S. Trible,Jr. United States, Senator Virginia or Darren S. Trigonoplos Legislative Assistant for Senator Trible United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510 The Senate Bill 1305 is called the Computer Pornorgraphy and Child Exploitation Prevention Act of 1985. It is currently under study in the Senate Subcommittee on Juvenile Justice. Ken Kaplan SYSOP Fido 100/22 or 100/51 ------------------------------ From: tanner <@csnet-relay.arpa,@ucf.CSNET:tanner@ki4pv.uucp> Date: Fri Aug 30 11:33:46 1985 Subject: Re: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #27 (porno BBS's -- against law?) Pornography is defined by the supreme court as "anything that offends the local authorities"; this is known as the "community standards" ruling. Pornographic BBS's, as all other BBS's (and all other publishing, both electronic and paper) are protected by the first amendment. This does not apply in more conservative areas of the country of course. tanner andrews uucp: ...decvax!ucf-cs!ki4pv!tanner ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29-Aug-85 10:14:01 PDT From: vortex!lauren@rand-unix.ARPA (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: Satellite viewing "freedoms" (long) To: TELECOM@XX.ARPA I think there's rather a lot of misconception floating around regarding this issue. Part of my work is in the satellite communications area so I track these issues pretty closely. There have been a number of different legal events and laws regarding this area, and I'm not going to try specify them, but rather just explain the backround and outcome as I understand them. --- First of all, the oft-quoted old Communications Act doesn't really say you can listen/watch to whatever you want. It essentially says you can receive "broadcast" signals so long as you don't divulge the contents nor receive "benefit" from them. Interpretations of this law have long held that intercepting point-to-point telephone microwave transmissions can be construed as wiretapping, by the way. I'm simplifying to some extent regarding the Act, but you get the idea. Now, "benefit" can be defined in different ways. On one end, you might say you benefit only if you sell the signals/info you received and make money. On the other hand, it might be said that you benefit simply from enjoying the signals! In practice, the current legal view has been shifting from a strict interpretation more like the former view towards a different concept. More and more, "benefit" is being viewed as being able to receive something for free that other people have to pay a fee to receive. There are numerous complexities and exceptions. For example, if you scramble your signal, the current view is that you're not really "broadcasting" but really trying to do a multipoint feed to particular people. If you intended the signal for general reception, you wouldn't scramble. Laws now generally protect scrambled transmissions as being essentially "non-broadcast" entities. A recent California appeals case convicted someone of viewing unscrambled microwave MDS--but this case seems a bit cloudy and runs contrary to the general pattern--it may yet be overturned (MDS cases are often tricky, but I won't go into the details of this case here). Now, back to satellites. The people who transmit the popular cable services say they are not broadcasting to the public--that they are providing a service for their cable system affiliates only. This view was somewhat difficult to support given that the public ended up watching these signals in great numbers on cable systems. The situation was complicated by the fact that many people did not have access to cable and had no alternative to receiving the signals directly if they wanted to see them. This wouldn't have caused much trouble if the services had, by and large, been willing to deal with individuals. But most of them flatly refused to deal with other than cable entities, claiming the administrative hassles of dealing lots of individuals was too great. Of course, many people indeed bought dishes simply to avoid paying for cable, even when cable was available. For a number of reasons, this restriction was eventually rejected by Congress. The decision was made (as I understand it) that most unscrambled satellite transmissions were indeed fair game to receive, but that the public viewing these indeed DID receive benefit from receiving them, since their counterparts who subscribed to cable had to pay. The end result was the concept that you could watch pretty much whatever unscrambled transmissions you wanted, but if the signals were offered for sale to the general public at a fair and equitable price then you must pay for them. In other words, if a satellite service WERE WILLING to deal with you as an individual, and charged you an equitable fee in comparison to cable subscribers, you need to pay the fee since you are receiving benefit from the transmissions. If the service were unscrambled and refused to deal with you, then you were free to receive the service. In practice, there are other issues involved also, and this is just my own interpretation of events--take it for whatever value you will, but I think I'm pretty close to the bottom-line facts. Right now there is some hangling between some satellite services and congressmen who supported the bills in questions over the matter of pricing. There are some claims that the fees being charged to individuals are much higher than the fees charged per subscriber to cable systems... but the services claim that this is equitable given the administrative overhead of billing and record keeping for individuals. This issue has yet to be fully resolved. Issues of scrambled vs. non-scrambled transmissions are also still somewhat hazy in areas. Finally, I might add that I doubt very much that there would be a public outcry to repeal such restrictions. If anything, most people would probably support tighter restrictions. Most people don't have their own dishes, and pay for cable services. I suspect that most of these people (rightly or wrongly) detest the people who they perceive as getting for "free" what *they* have to pay for. In fact, if you brought it to a vote, I'll bet that the population would happily vote in many other restrictions on spectrum listening--such as law enforcement transmissions, portable telephones, etc. The mood of the country is generally conservative on these issues, so I suggest that you think carefully before trying to get the public at large involved in such telecommunications matters. Please note that I'm not expressing an opinion one way or another about these particular issues, just passing along my understanding of the situation. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: Charles McGrew, The Moderator (Human-Nets-Request@RED.RUTGERS.EDU) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #31 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-09-24 22:06:00 PST HUMAN-NETS Digest Wednesday, 25 Sep 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 31 Today's Topics: Administrivia - Tymnet Access Numbers, Computers and the Law - The Right to Receive (3 msgs) & Preserving rights to Email messages (2 msgs), Computer Networks - Information Networks of the Future, Computers and People - Renaming So-called "Hackers", Announcement - Electronic Document distribution experiment & WG9.1 Conference Planned (IFIP) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 23 Sep 85 23:12:00 EDT From: Charles Subject: Tymnet Access numbers Thanks to William Daul, the latest Tymnet access numbers are available for anonymous FTP from tymnet.map from Rutgers. ------------------------------ Date: Monday, 16 Sep 1985 06:51:00-PDT From: minow%rex.DEC@decwrl.ARPA From: (Martin Minow, DECtalk Engineering ML3-1/U47 223-9922) Subject: secrecy of communications If I remember my communications law -- not likely as I haven't looked at it for a bunch of years -- there are two motivations for the "secrecy" clause of the Communications Act of 1934: 1. Anti-Jamming -- the USA says that its citizens my receive any broadcast signals. This means, in effect, that "we won't jam Radio Moscow" and thus implies that "The Russians shouldn't jam Voice of America." 2. Monitoring -- in certain circumstances a radio operator must listen to signals which are broadcast, but of a private nature. For example, a ship radio operator must monitor certain frequencies for distress calls and consequently may overhear communications that are not broadcast to a general audience. The Act holds that this is not illegal so long as the radio operator does not divulge the content of the message (except under certain circumstances, such as emergency broadcasts). Although Radio Communications has grown considerably since 1934, it does not appear to me that it explicitly permits a person to obtain personal benefit by receiving signals which are not broadcast to a general audience (even if this benefit extends only to watching WTBS). I believe also that even the "superstations" charge cable companies a fee (perhaps $.50 per household per month) for reception. Martin Minow decvax!minow @ decwrl.arpa minow%rex.dec @ decwrl.arpa ------------------------------ Date: 16 Sep 85 13:12:00 EDT From: "COTTRELL, JAMES" Subject: Right to Receive /* > I don't know if anyone noticed, but a few weeks ago the Supreme > Court threw away a right that Americans have had since day one. Well at least since 1906 :-) Also, several states (notably fascist Virginia) have declared radar detectors illegal as well. Supposedly, it is a crime to decrypt secure U.S. communications as well. jim cottrell@nbs */ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Aug 85 10:22 EDT From: taylor.WBST@Xerox.ARPA Subject: Re: Loss of Fredom... CC: To: Paul R. Grupp Cc: info-hams@SIMTEL20.ARPA I AGREE! I WONDER WHAT THE POSITION OF THE "VOICE OF THE RADIO AMATEUR" = THE ARRL, IS ON THIS LITTLE EROSION OF FREEDOM. JIM (W2OZH) ------------------------------ Date: 16-Sep-85 19:01 PDT From: William Daul / McDonnell-Douglas / APD-ASD From: Subject: Re: preserving rights to Email messages Cc: Hunter@YALE.ARPA What happend's to Gs copyrighted material sent by X via a a net to A and then A uses this material thinking it was public domain...G finds out about it...what happens now?...comments... --Bi// ------------------------------ Subject: Re: preserving rights to Email messages Date: Tue, 17 Sep 85 13:20:31 EDT From: Larry Hunter To: WBD.TYM@OFFICE-2 Copyright: Larry Hunter, 1985 What happend's to Gs copyrighted material sent by X via a a net to A and then A uses this material thinking it was public domain...G finds out about it...what happens now?...comments... --Bi// Like I said, ask a real lawyer if you have real problems. My guess is that G is entitled to fair compensation for his work and that A should try to nail any liability on X. If A made lots of money on G's work and X is some poor bboard op somewhere, then the 'deep pockets' will probably pay... I'd check into copyrights at your local law library; at this point there is nothing special about the electronic nature of the communiation. Larry ------------------------------ To: veeger!hpcnof!hplabs!Human-Nets@red.rutgers.edu Date: Wed, 18 Sep 85 12:52:39 MDT From: Dave Taylor Subject: Information Overload I've been thinking about the current electronic mail system from an 'in-the-large' point of view and thought I'd bounce a few ideas off of the people in this group. If anyone has any thoughts, positive or negative, please don't hesitate to respond!! The basic issue is 'how?'. We currently have a somewhat juryrigged electronic mail network that through some miracle works most of the time. While we could simply use the existing systems as a basis for future systems, I'd rather see us redesign it to be a more intuitive system accessable by non-tech-fanatics. Currently, we have a 'paper' mail system that works very well and is very well integrated into 'societal' conciousness. While this isn't necessarily the ideal either, it's certainly true that any schoolchild can send mail to someone else. Let's use that as a model then, and see what sort of information we need to have for electronic communications... The first data we'd need, obviously, is the persons name. It would be nice if we could simply type in "Dave Taylor", for example, as the persons name, rather than decipering some cryptic /etc/password entry (like 'dat')... Next, on surface mail, we'd have a company name, something like "HP - CNO". Let's assume we can do that on this mail too... The third data point is the street address, then the city, state and zip code. So far, my address looks like: Dave Taylor, HP - CNO, 3404 Harmony Rd, Fort Collins, Co, 80525 Now let's go back to electronic mail and figure out how we could offer an analogous service... The simplest way would be to assign 'geographical clearing house' computers, and this would be parsed backwards - we'd check the zip code (80525) against a table of codes and find a machine address from that. This machine would know about the next significant data point - the street address. (The city and state are implied by the zip code, I believe). At this point, it might actually use the company name too, if present. Finally, it would be routed to a 'master' machine here in CNO, for example, that would then try to figure out who Dave Taylor was. I think the biggest problem with this is that it would involve a lot of machines knowing about a lot of data. Especially parsing the street address would be difficult. (We haven't considered international mail either). Another alternative is to be able to specify the person by the equivalent significant data: "dave taylor, hp, fort collins, co" and parse that backwards. This has the same problems as the previous scheme, it's just a little more easy to use. (no mysterious 5/9 digit zip code). Let's go a bit further...."Dave Taylor, HP, Colorado". This could be parsed by the sending machine for the state, then, within the state, by company. If it didn't know the company/state address combination, it would mail to a default hub machine in that state. That machine would then be responsible for either knowing the company name, having special instructions about the individual name (like "Ronald Reagan, Washington DC") or send the mail back informing the original sender that the address was unknown. Each geographic region would then be responsible for having a hub system that would be able to talk to all the other hub systems (we'll get to that in a 'sec) and would also know about all the companies that are in business in that region. (We've changed the application slightly to 'institutions' (companies and colleges)...) Mail, then, would always be routed to: yourmachine - geographic-hub { - other geographic-hub } { - their company-hub } - theirmachine So mail to me from Los Angeles, for example, would go (assume we're sending from ucla-cs): ucla-cs - la-hub - colorado-hub - hp-colorado-hub - hp-cno This would mean that the person mailing from UCLA would have specified: Dave Taylor, Hewlett Packard, Colorado rather than: ucla-cs!ucbvax!ihnp4!hpfcla!hpcnoe!veeger!hpcnou!dat considerably friendlier. There are still some difficulties with this system, mostly to do with the size of the databases and the traffic that big hubs (like 'silicon-valley-hub' or 'indian-hills-hub') would get, but I'm more interested in the conceptual layer...the implementation details are 'best left up to the student'. Well? Any thoughts?? -- Dave Taylor, HP, Colorado or, if you must: ..hplabs!hpcnof!dat ..ihnp4!hpfcla!d_taylor hpcnof!dat@HPLABS.CSNET-RELAY ------------------------------ Date: Fri 13 Sep 85 14:01:19-PDT From: Douglas Edwards Subject: The Poll on Renaming So-called "Hackers" The term "cracker" is most appropriate; it's even catchier than "hacker" and carries the association of safecracking. I've already started using it in place of "hacker" in conversation, to denote those who break into computer systems. I had heard the term "hacker" used for years, to mean simply a clever and/or obsessive programmer, before I ever heard it used to mean a cracker. We should return it to its original sense. ------------------------------ From: Jim Guyton To: MsgGroup@brl Cc: IRList%vpi@csnet-relay, rand-docs@rand-unix.ARPA Subject: Electronic Document distribution experiment Date: 22 Sep 85 13:50:19 PDT (Sun) ARPANET ANNOUNCEMENT The Rand Corporation is conducting an experiment in electronic publishing. The documents listed below have been fully reviewed and published as printed Rand publications. By making the same document (excluding tables and graphics) available on the ARPANET, Rand is attempting to assess the needs of the electronic user. If you are interested in copying any of the documents, please contact RAND-DOCS@RAND-UNIX.ARPA. We will send you an electronic questionnaire, and as soon as you complete and return it, we will supply the information you need to access the document. We may also send you a follow-up questionnaire to get your reaction to the electronic document. If you find that the electronic version doesn't meet your needs because of the missing illustrations and graphics, you can then contact RAND-DOCS and order a printed copy of the document which will be sent to you via the U.S. Post. We welcome any comments or suggestions on this experiment. Just send all correspondence to RAND-DOCS@RAND-UNIX.ARPA. AVAILABLE TITLES R-3283-NSF/RC "Toward an Ethics and Etiquette for Electronic Mail," by N.A. Shapiro, R.H. Anderson. July 1985. (95K bytes) R-3160-AF "ROSS: An Object-Oriented Language for Constructing Simulations," by D. McArthur, P. Klahr, S. Narain, October 1984. (64K bytes) R-3158-AF "TWIRL: Tactical Warfare in the ROSS Language," by P. Klahr, J.W. Ellis, Jr., W.D. Giarla, S. Narain, E.M. Cesar, Jr., S. Turner, September 1984. (150K bytes) ABSTRACTS of above documents: R-3283-NSF/RC. Toward an Ethics and Etiquette for Electronic Mail. N.A. Shapiro, R.H. Anderson. July 1985, 35 pp., $4.00 This report discusses some important general attributes of electronic mail and message systems, and the effects of those attributes on the quality and appropriateness of communication. The authors discuss the "etiquette" of sending and receiving electronic mail, drawing on personal observation of inappropriate and counterproductive uses of these systems. By presenting some initial guidelines, the authors attempt to accelerate the process by which social customs and behavior appropriate to electronic mail become established, and thereby to accelerate the effective use of such systems. R-3160-AF. ROSS: An Object-Oriented Language for Constructing Simulations. D. McArthur, P. Klahr, S. Narain. October 1984, 28 pp., Ref., $4.00 This report provides an overview of ROSS, an object-oriented language currently being developed at Rand. The goal of ROSS is to provide a programming environment in which users can conveniently design, test, and modify large knowledge-based simulations of complex mechanisms. Object-oriented programming languages, and ROSS in particular, enforce a message-passing style of programming in which the system to be modeled is represented as a set of objects and their behaviors (rules for object interaction). This style is especially suited to simulation, since the mechanism or process to be simulated may have a decomposition that maps naturally onto objects, and the real-world interactions between the objects may be easily modeled by object behaviors and object message transmissions. In addition to describing some of the basic ROSS commands and features, the report discusses some software that interfaces directly with ROSS, including a sophisticated screen-oriented editor and a color graphics package. Facilities for browsing among objects and their behaviors are also described, and examples of browsing and editing are presented using SWIRL, a military combat simulation written in ROSS. R-3158-AF. TWIRL: Tactical Warfare in the ROSS Language. P.Klahr, J.W. Ellis, Jr., W.D. Giarla, S. Narain, E.M. Cesar, Jr., S.Turner, September 1984, 49 pp., Bibliog., $4.00 This report describes TWIRL, a simulation of a primarily ground combat engagement between two opposing military forces. It was developed to further experiment with the ROSS language, an object-oriented simulation language that was successfully used to develop the SWIRL air battle simulation, and to develop a prototype simulation that could be used to explore issues in electronic combat. The authors describe the objects that comprise TWIRL and provide extensive examples of object behaviors to explain and illustrate the process of building a simulation in ROSS. ------------------------------ Date: 18-Sep-85 16:39 PDT From: William Daul / McDonnell-Douglas / APD-ASD From: Subject: WG9.1 Conference Planned (IFIP) To: DCE.TYM@OFFICE-2.ARPA Cc: GNOSIS.TYM@OFFICE-2.ARPA, MARKET.TYM@OFFICE-2.ARPA System Design for Human Development and Productivity: Participation and Beyond is the title of a conference planned by the IFIP Working Group on Computers and Work (WG9.1) 12-15 May 1986 in Berlin (DDR). This is the first conference sponsored by IFIP's Technical Committee on the Relationship between Computers and Society (TC9) in an Eastern European country. The conference will address emerging trends in system design: strategies of intervention; changes in work organization; new, flexible technologies; and interests and attitudes of the people involved. The Conference and Program chairman is Dr. Klaus Fuchs-Kittowski (DDR). For more information, contact-- De. Ernst Muhlenberg Humbolt-University Sektion Wissenschaftstheoryie und -organisation 1086 Berlin, German Democratic Republic ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: Charles McGrew, The Moderator (Human-Nets-Request@RED.RUTGERS.EDU) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #32 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-10-01 17:06:00 PST HUMAN-NETS Digest Tuesday, 1 Oct 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 32 Today's Topics: Queries - Voice Mail info & Bboard Usage Within Companies, Computer Networks - Email addressing (4 msgs), Announcement - Social Impacts of Computers Curriculum ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sunday, 29 Sep 1985 16:33:18-PDT From: minow%rex.DEC@decwrl.ARPA From: (Martin Minow, DECtalk Engineering ML3-1/U47 223-9922) Subject: Voice Mail info request I'm trying to write a paper tracing the history of "voice mail" systems and vaguely recall some work done in the '70's on ARPAnet (ARPA Speech Project?) but can't seem to track down any references (except for a few semi-annual reports from Lincoln Labs complaining about memory errors on the TX-2.) Any pointers to the literature would be appreciated. Please mail to me and I'll summarize for TELECOM if there's any interest. Thanks. Martin Minow ARPA: minow%rex.dec@decwrl.arpa UUCP: decvax!minow ------------------------------ Date: 30-Sep-85 21:45 PDT From: William Daul / McDonnell-Douglas / APD-ASD From: Subject: BBOARD USAGE WITHIN COMPANIES Cc: DCE.TYM@OFFICE-2.ARPA I would like to make contact with people that are using BBOARDS within a comapny. I would like further information on how you use them and for what purposes. Thanks in advance, --Bi// ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Sep 85 14:48:48 edt From: BostonU SysMgr Subject: Towards a more 'human' method of e-mail addressing (SOLVED!) Dave Taylor of HP suggests that the US Postal system method of addressing be used as a model for electronic mail. The argument goes that a child can manage to use the US Postal system. The point that is missed is that humans do a lot in the delivery of mail, far more than should be expected in electronic mail (probably far more than we can endlessly afford to do in paper mail.) For example, if that same child sends me a letter: Barry Shein Boston Unverstety 111 Cummington St. Boston, Masachoosets 02215 I suspect it will get here in about the same time it would take if everything was correct, because a human usually has little difficulty dealing with minor errors (I can't even represent badly formed/backwards letters that we always see in those cute notes to santy claws.) We are unfortunately likely to have to conform to the stupidity of these machines which, in an area like e-mail, aren't likely to get a whole lot more human (oh, we could handle some little spelling errors, but for the foreseeable future the cost tradeoffs weigh heavily in favor of 'get it right or get it back'. Actually, a more obvious candidate for a model that works quite well is the phone system. Perhaps we need to consider whether or not AT&T got it right the first time and this little foray into 'humanizing' addressing has actually been a total failure. As you say, it takes (for some reason) a techno-nurd to get most mail addresses right, but it seems that little children use the phone system, as 'inhuman' as addressing people by a string of digits is. The defaults are quite rational (assume local area code if none etc etc, in office systems, assume local exchange if none.) What is really wrong with the idea of an e-mail system sending to me via: mail 617-353-9071 (my office line) or possibly mail "Barry Shein"@617-353-2780 (the front desk here) throw in a few mnemonics possibly (like 'Fieldstone 7-7779, the phone # of my childhood, certainly BU3-2780 or some such could be arranged, and more, like companies get (1-800-ATT-UNIX.) Add a simple list processor into your mailer to set-up and automatically use 'frequently called numbers' and re-dial perhaps and I personally think the problem ends up just about solved (oh yeah, country codes too, I think ATT has solved this whole problem, why are we re-inventing a very well demonstrated wheel?) In a commentary on the phone system and its use of digits, Harry Reasoner remarked 'the most miraculous thing about our technological systems are the people who use them' (ie. the way they adapt to them.) I agree. How many of you out there keep lists of people's phone #s and e-mail addresses? A lot I bet, why not consolidate (and hey! you can then maybe use 555-1212 and phone books to possibly get peoples e-mail addresses, for a very small amount of $$ listings could be added like: Boston University CS E-mail 353-1010 right in with the other listings, it might even be a real phone (I guess AT&T would require it to be, but certainly there are enough phones around computers that one could be chosen and given a double listing!) Solved, when do we start? -Barry Shein, Boston University ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Sep 85 11:25:05 EDT From: "Marvin A. Sirbu, Jr." Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #31 The CCITT is currently developing a draft standard for electronic mail names and a directory service to go with the X.400 standard for message format and distribution. Copies of the latest draft are available from Omnicom in McLean, Va. The standard is very similar to the , , system proposed by Dave Taylor. Marvin Sirbu ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 28 Sep 85 22:18 MST From: "Ronald B. Harvey" Subject: Re: Information Overload Mr. Taylor brings up some interesting questions regarding location of individuals by computer. There is currently work going on in several groups of ANSI/ECMA/ISO/CCITT on Directory Services. I believe that the ANSI group is X3T5.4. I don't have any more information about that group at this time (being at home) but by calling ANSI you should be able to get the chairman's name/number and determine next meeting info, etc. What has been proposed so far (and I think this has consensus) is that there would be a global naming tree that would be navigated based upon things like country, company, department, title, name, address, etc. All of the details of all of the attributes are not standardized, nor do I believe they are meant to be. Also, this directory system is meant to be distributed, so that not every system has to know all of the tree, but instead can 'learn' more about parts of the tree as it has to by asking the responsible parties for the information. Of course, there is the issue of directory costs, etc. Suppose you accidentally invoke a search that causes your service to look for all of the people named Murphy in Ireland? There is also privacy - should you be able to find all of the women in France with (or without?) company affiliations? These and more tough questions like them are still open for discussion. I don't think that they have been seriously addressed yet (except as a "yes, we will have to get to that someday"). Note that I am not directly involved in this area of standardization, nor is anybody that I talk to frequently. However, I do try to track it to some extent. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Sep 85 13:18 EST From: Spiros Triantafyllopoulus Subject: Re: Information Overload I read the posting by Dave Taylor, and I found some parts quite interesting. The objective is still down the road, though. The main concern, as far as I can tell, is addressing. And here is the good old argument about easy-to-use vs. hard-to-use ssystems. I don't mind an address such as ihnp4!-ut-sally!usl!usl-pa!jihres10 for me. The address can be kept in a way similar to phone numbers, i.e. in a rolodex or something. By attempting to make the system use USnail addressing we only complicate it further without much gain. If a person can't type all this string, then!. And, for a large number of people, the rolodex is still good. Using a paper mail-based addressing scheme does not do much good. See, in the first place you have to remember the full address and the way the guy spells the name (is it McDonnald or MacDonald or Mc. Donnald, :-)). Having a unique code (i.e mcdonnald) helps much more. Of course you need the rolodex, like: +------------------+----------------------------------------+ | Mac Donald, Mike | ihnp4!here!there!and-finally!mcdonnald | | : : : | | At the worst case, a local front-end, specific to each user can be maintained. Dave's proposed system is superior to the one i suggested above (and which i use for the last N years in USENET, CSNET, etc) in terms of not having to know the address. That is, if you have never mailed anything to the guy before or do not know his address. To save your day, this can also be implemented as the 1-XXX-555-1212 type of thing, like directory assistance where you can dial in and search in the hub site. (kinda like a net name server). Then, you can keep the complexity only to the hubs and let the end computers (i.e. PC's, MAC's and the such) only dial in to the name server, find the address and proceed. I think we should assimilate the hoped-for electronic mail system more to a telephone system and less to a paper-based system. After all, paper systems ARE ineffective and inflexible (i.e no re-routing, redundancy, etc). Cheers -- Spiros Triantafyllopoulos GM Research Labs, Warren, MI CSNet: Spiros@GMR UUCP : ihnp4!sally!usl!sigma ------------------------------ Date: 26 Sep 1985 0911-PDT From: Rob-Kling Subject: Social Impacts of Computing: Graduate Study at UC-Irvine To: telecom@MIT-MC CORPS ------- Graduate Education in Computing, Organizations, Policy, and Society at the University of California, Irvine This graduate concentration at the University of California, Irvine provides an opportunity for scholars and students to investigate the social dimensions of computerization in a setting which supports reflective and sustained inquiry. The primary educational opportunities are PhD concentrations in the Department of Information and Computer Science (ICS) and MS and PhD concentrations in the Graduate School of Management (GSM). Students in each concentration can specialize in studying the social dimensions of computing. The faculty at Irvine have been active in this area, with many interdisciplinary projects, since the early 1970's. The faculty and students in the CORPS have approached them with methods drawn from the social sciences. The CORPS concentration focuses upon four related areas of inquiry: 1. Examining the social consequences of different kinds of computerization on social life in organizations and in the larger society. 2. Examining the social dimensions of the work and organizational worlds in which computer technologies are developed, marketed, disseminated, deployed, and sustained. 3. Evaluating the effectiveness of strategies for managing the deployment and use of computer-based technologies. 4. Evaluating and proposing public policies which facilitate the development and use of computing in pro-social ways. Studies of these questions have focussed on complex information systems, computer-based modelling, decision-support systems, the myriad forms of office automation, electronic funds transfer systems, expert systems, instructional computing, personal computers, automated command and control systems, and computing at home. The questions vary from study to study. They have included questions about the effectiveness of these technologies, effective ways to manage them, the social choices that they open or close off, the kind of social and cultural life that develops around them, their political consequences, and their social carrying costs. CORPS studies at Irvine have a distinctive orientation - (i) in focussing on both public and private sectors, (ii) in examining computerization in public life as well as within organizations, (iii) by examining advanced and common computer-based technologies "in vivo" in ordinary settings, and (iv) by employing analytical methods drawn from the social sciences. Organizational Arrangements and Admissions for CORPS The CORPS concentration is a special track within the normal graduate degree programs of ICS and GSM. Admission requirements for this concentration are the same as for students who apply for a PhD in ICS or an MS or PhD in GSM. Students with varying backgrounds are encouraged to apply for the PhD programs if they show strong research promise. The seven primary faculty in the CORPS concentration hold appointments in the Department of Information and Computer Science and the Graduate School of Management. Additional faculty in the School of Social Sciences, and the program on Social Ecology, have collaborated in research or have taught key courses for CORPS students. Our research is administered through an interdisciplinary research institute at UCI which is part of the Graduate Division, the Public Policy Research Organization. Students who wish additional information about the CORPS concentration should write to: Professor Rob Kling (Kling@uci-icsa) Department of Information and Computer Science University of California, Irvine Irvine, Ca. 92717 714-856-5955 or 856-7548 or to: Professor Kenneth Kraemer (Kraemer@uci-icsa) Graduate School of Management University of California, Irvine Irvine, Ca. 92717 714-856-5246 ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: Charles McGrew, The Moderator (Human-Nets-Request@RED.RUTGERS.EDU) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #33 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-10-07 14:32:00 PST HUMAN-NETS Digest Monday, 7 Oct 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 33 Today's Topics: Query - WG9.1 Conference Planned, Computers and People - Working at Home, Computer Networks - Logical Email Addressing (4 msgs) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 2 Oct 1985 15:27-EDT From: Benjamin.Pierce@G.CS.CMU.EDU Subject: Re: WG9.1 Conference Planned (IFIP) Does anyone have any more specifics on the conference? I'm particularly interested in paper submission deadlines and desired range of topics, official language(s), how many and what sort of people are expected to attend (scientists, engineers, students, managers, etc.), and what kind of mix is expected of east and west block attendees. I've written to Dr. Muhlenberg, but mail to East Berlin is notoriously slow. Benjamin C. Pierce ------------------------------ Date: Mon 7 Oct 85 11:26:07-MDT From: William G. Martin Subject: Home computing work Here's something of interest from Info-Hams that I thought Human-Netters would find worthwhile: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :: :: :: T H E W 5 Y I R E P O R T :: :: :: :: D i t s & B i t s :: :: :: :: Vol 7 #18 -- 9/15/85 :: :: :: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Up to the minute news from the worlds of amateur radio, personal computing and emerging electronics. While no guarantee is made, information is from sources we believe to be reliable. May be reproduced providing credit is given to The W5YI Report. [Extract:] o Independent Computer Cottagers ------------------------------ Do you have some sort of computer linked business "on the side"... maybe even full time... that you do from your home? If so, you might want to consider being a member of AEC... the Association of Electronic Cottagers formed in January 1985. Formed by Paul and Sarah Edwards of (677 Canyon Drive), Sierra Madre, California (91024), AEC is designed to support the growing number of people who work from their home with personal computers. The Association of Electronic Cottagers is partly a support group for the cottage industries made possible using personal computers and partly a rights watchdog for home workers. Members of AEC can obtain marketing assistance, business consultation and other services... also access up-to-the-minute news affecting their interests through a monthly newsletter, an online hotline, bulletin boards, electronic conferences and private databases available through the CompuServe Information Service. AEC evolved out of an international computer network... the Work-At-Home special interest group (SIG) of CompuServe, an interactive database for computer users. The Edwards' began this SIG because they wanted to meet other entrepreneurs and believed others had the same need. Labor unions see working at home and telecommuting as a threat. Local bureaucrats, using zoning laws, have put some home computer workers out of business. AEC has put together an Electronic Bill of Rights which, among other things, asks that legislatures make no laws prohibiting freedom to work in one's home... when that work does not interfere with neighbor's enjoyment of their own homes and communities. The Edwards' are the authors of several books on working from home with a personal computer. Paul is an attorney... Sarah holds a Masters degree in Social Work. Their 18-year old son is an engineering student at UCLA. [End this issue] ------------------------------ Date: Wednesday, 2 Oct 1985 20:09:58-PDT From: goutal%parrot.DEC@decwrl.ARPA Subject: logical email addressing I must confess to having been out of touch for a while, and so have not tracked all the latest proposals in this area. I think, however, that I have a little tidbit to contribute. First, I *am* a technical type, so am not put off by horrible long strings of apparent nonsense -- occasionally. However, I do get tired of typing all that stuff every time I want to send a message to my boss or to my next-cubby neighbor, which I do a couple dozen times a day. I also don't like to have to remember arcane alphabet soup when I want to send a message to an old friend to whom I haven't sent something in a while. Still, I can quite understand that that's what the computer needs in order to do the job I want it to do for me. My way around this is with logical names. The phrase "logical name" must mean different things on different systems, but I'm sure they usually amount to something like "a name you can invent to mean something else, and have the system remember your definition". So, just as I use DAT$SLRR to mean the full file spec for an ISAM file on short-line railroads, and LNK$LIBRARY to refer to my private library of runtime object code modules, and HLP: to refer to the directory where help texts, user guides, and the like are found, in like fashion I use $JOE as the address of my office mate (his username, which is his last name, is a little hard on the fingers), $D for my boss, $B for a colleague across the building, $HUM for the moderator/distributor/whatever of Humanettes Digest, and just net.rr for the railroad newsgroup on Usenet. It is also common for system managers to define system-wide logical names for use by MAIL, either to reroute incoming mail for departed users, or to make it easier for local users to send mail to complex addresses, such as gateways or distribution list moderators. I've never seen this done with "group logical names", but there's no reason it couldn't be done. VMSmail, at least, just uses the regular VMS logical-name facility, and all this falls out. Basically, I'm just using the logical-name facility in the operating system as a sort of localized, personalized name server. This buys me a fair bit until the real thing comes along. It would be interesting to see if operating-system-dependent logical-name facilities could be subsumed under network-wide name services. This would mean that my collection of handy names for people would be directly connected to the ever-more-global tree of ever-less-handy adddresses for them, in a more-or-less invisible way. I'll be interested to see how the "TO" address of this message shows up in the digest. All I gave it was "$HUM". The commands in the background that make this possible are: $ Define $HUM USENET::"""HUMAN-NETS@RUTGERS.ARPA""" $ Define USENET "RHEA::DECWRL::" By the way, within the DEC domain, addresses are nowhere near as complicated as they are in, say, uucp-land. A simple nodename::username pair will send your message winging its way directly to that user on that node, in a network of thousands of node around the globe. (I gather this is essentially true in the ARPA domain, although I don't believe the set of nodes is as large.) -- Kenn Goutal ...decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-parrot!goutal (or however we say it this month) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1985 16:34 EDT From: Jon Solomon To: BostonU SysMgr Subject: Towards a more 'human' method of e-mail addressing (SOLVED!) Well, Barry. There are several problems with that addressing scheme that need to be worked out: Does every e-mail user now *have* to have a phone number associated with it? I can imagine every student at every university given a special phone number associated with their name for the purpose of receiving network mail. Would the reverse always apply (i.e. if I know someone's E-mail address, do I then know their phone number?) What about unlisted numbers? Phone numbers are typically assigned in technically-feasable methods. It would, for example, be impossible in the current environment for me to get JON-SOLOMON as a telephone number (notice that I am conveniently 10 digits long) (note: This may change as we run out of area codes, but unless I lived in area code (JON) and had prefix 765 (SOL), *and* they hadn't assigned SOL-OMON (765-6666) to someone else, it would at the very least be very expensive (ever check into how much a foreign exchange costs? And my local calling area would be most likely far away from my home (if I recall, 617-765 is not in the Boston Metropolitan area). I have considered 800-SOLOMON, which is about $100/month excluding usage... You mention in the same breath that children spell things wrong, and sometimes write letters backwards, *and* that they use the phone system properly. I can remember back when I first started using the phone system. I was about 11 or 12, just entering puberty. I started by remembering my relatives phone numbers (I still know my number from back then..). But, you and I are not typical of 12 year olds. We were both interested in the phone network. Also, by the time you and I were 12, we both probably knew how to spell Massachusetts without printing backwards. Younger children (first learning to write, for example) would probably have the same trouble with a dial or touch tone phone as they would have had with a pen or pencil. If I remember correctly, kids of those age are mainly taught how to dial 0 when there is an emergency and to tell the operator what is wrong. Anyway, none of this really excludes using the telephone numbering scheme as a standard for mail addresses, it just points out that just like the scheme we use now, it has flaws. Cheers, --JSol ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 85 20:58:53 edt From: BostonU SysMgr To: jsol@bostonu.CSNET Subject: Re: Towards a more 'human' method of e-mail addressing Subject: (SOLVED!) >Does every e-mail user now *have* to have a phone number associated >with it? No, you missed my point, only machines need to have 'phone-numbers', this is a scheme for host-naming, my address in this scheme might become: bzs@617-353-2780 w/in America bzs@353-2780 w/in (617) bzs@3-2780 w/in BU or even "Barry Shein"@one-of-the-above (the user name is undefined in this scheme, current conventions could apply) of course, your mailer has a line in it's startup file like: host bu-cs 617-353-2780 so you can send bzs@bu-cs if you like. As a matter of fact, for all the mail system would care you could have: host mit-mc 617-353-2780 and sending to bzs@mit-mc would just go to bu-cs, it's a silly example, but it does show how trivial 'conveniences' could be built in if you prefer and how ambiguity is solved, no matter what a machine likes to be called (R2D2, BILBO etc) is up to individuals, for all mail delivery it must end up with an envelope containing the phone number on it. > What about unlisted numbers? I assume this is a more important objection presuming your first (mistaken) assumption that each user has a #, I presume that each machine (only) has a number. Obviously for organizational machines this could be the same as their 'front-desk' (note: the phone number is only a naming convention and does not imply the number is ever actually called or a phone is involved anywhere in the actual transport of mail, IT'S JUST A NAMING CONVENTION WITH A NAMING AUTHORITY (ie. the phone company.) In the case of personal computers, where you do not want, say, a phone that rings in your house, published, there are obvious solutions: 1. If you don't like to interact with people stay off the net. (sorry, but it is a consideration.) Only use public machines for your mail. 2. Buy a phone just for your PC and remove the ringer (privacy costs) Maybe you did this already for a modem. 3. Set up something with someone to feed you indirectly so only that site knows your true number (ie. an alias on that site.) 4. Use your office phone, a friend's office phone, a pay-phone number out in the hall or maybe just choose an 'impossible' number (like 123-3434) and hope no one else does. The point is this is a special case, judging by the number of phone numbers that remain in the white pages one has to assume this is not a universal problem, as I said, privacy costs, you will have to use a scheme to hide your real number. >Phone numbers are typically assigned in technically-feasable methods. >It would, for example, be impossible in the current environment for >me to get JON-SOLOMON as a telephone number I assume this objection is resolved by the realization that hosts have phone numbers, not users. The use of aliases reduces the nuisance, besides, is your home phone # JON-SOLOMON?? Why is that ok? (or more to the point, in what way is this worse?) >You mention in the same breath that children spell things wrong, >and sometimes write letters backwards, *and* that they use the phone >system properly. My point wasn't so much to devise a system small children can use, only to point out that a lot of people (even children) can manage to use the phone system and there seems to be a general feeling that the current various host naming conventions confuse all but the most ardent mail hackers (and even them.) >Cheers, >--JSol -Barry Shein, Boston University ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1985 22:51 EDT From: Jon Solomon To: BostonU SysMgr Subject: Towards a more 'human' method of e-mail addressing (SOLVED!) Well, the current domain scheme is fairly simple to understand, except that it uses brain damaged boundaries. EDU COM GOV ORG MIL Stupid, who else but ARPANET people would understand why they chose these. Fortunately, I believe the International standards will come up with something better... *country* *names*! US UK FR CAN etc... What I'd love is "Jon Solomon"@BUCS20.BU.MA.US That would be REALLY simple, and would be basically a rearrangement of what we are already having imposed on us. Directory assistance? Why not have "General Delivery"? That's what most people are doing. Send mail to BBN.COM? Berkeley.EDU? PURDUE.EDU? HARVARD.EDU? LCS.MIT.EDU? Same idea. Have a host who'se name is the same as their domain. It accepts mail for everyone in the domain and knows how to forward. Much easier than (617) 623-JSOL (which *is* my phone number). No, I couldn't get JON-SOLOMON, or 617-SOLOMON, but that didn't stop me from trying. The Post Office, and the Telephone company basically do the same thing different ways. They get messages to people. Both methods have been around for quite some time, the post office much longer. If you go adopt a telephone based system, there will probably be some bureaucrat who want's to intervene. Look at FTS, the Autovon, TELEX (with it's brain damaged area codes), and Digitals DTN! Flame off. --JSol ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: human-nets@cca.UUCP (human-nets@cca.UUCP) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #34 Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Date: 1985-10-15 15:50:49 PST From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) HUMAN-NETS Digest Monday, 14 Oct 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 34 Today's Topics: Computers and the Law - Slander vs. Libel, Computer Networks - Email Addressing (2 msgs), Announcements - MIT Communications Forum & New Mailing List & New Digest Service ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun 13 Oct 85 19:41:32-PDT From: Ken Laws Subject: Slander vs. Libel An interesting question for Human-Nets. The answer may depend partly on whether the injured party has the opportunity to respond to the original audience if redress is found appropriate. -- Ken Laws Date: Fri, 11 Oct 85 07:22:09 pdt From: edsel!jim@su-navajo.arpa (Jim McDonald) Subject: slander vs. libel Technically, of course, the discussions [on SU-BBoards] so far have been about libel, not slander, unless people are also verbalizing their thoughts. This observation, plus my experience with speech synthesizers, led me to wonder if machine-generated speech would be libel or slander, assuming it was one of the two. (Assume also that someone typed in normal sentences, which the machine merely transduced to speech.) I suppose only a lawyer would care... jim mcdonald ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Oct 85 13:20 EDT From: Robert W. Kerns Subject: Towards a more 'human' method of e-mail addressing (SOLVED!) To: BostonU SysMgr Date: Sun, 29 Sep 85 14:48:48 edt From: BostonU SysMgr Dave Taylor of HP suggests that the US Postal system method of addressing be used as a model for electronic mail. The argument goes that a child can manage to use the US Postal system. ... Actually, a more obvious candidate for a model that works quite well is the phone system. ... How many of you out there keep lists of people's phone #s and e-mail addresses? A lot I bet, why not consolidate (and hey! you can then maybe use 555-1212 and phone books to possibly get peoples e-mail addresses, for a very small amount of $$ listings could be added like: ... "Gack!" -- Bill the Cat "Computers plot takeover of our minds!" -- National Enquirer I will just observe that I keep a list of people's phone #'s (and several phone books), yet I successfully keep ALL the mail addresses I use in my head. (With the exception of UUCP routes, of course). How many phone numbers do YOU remember? People adapt to numbers because they must, not because it is easy. -- Bob "Not a number" Kerns, RWK@SCRC.Symbolics.Com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Oct 85 11:36:48 EDT From: Frank Ritter To: human-nets@rutgers.ARPA Subject: re: logical mail addresses Quite a few people in their flames about addresses have forgotten how the current system has come about. It is a kludged together system, with parts taken from many systems, and not all designed at once, and not all at the same cost. Mail costs money through connect time on the machine, (who will pay for a machine for a specific domain?), phone lines or the equivalent (why isn't Boston University on csnet and not arpa? cost. uucp is orders of magnitude cheaper), and the politics of setting up the net (do you want to tell someone that half his cycles will go to routing mail to his competitors machine?). Please be reasonable in the schemes you propose. I don't do networks, but the above observations will have to be dealt with in any proposal. Frank Ritter(not associated in anyway with people doing networks at BBN) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Oct 85 13:49 EDT From: Kahin@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA Subject: MIT Communications Forum To: Telecom@USC-ECLC.ARPA, *bboard@MIT-MC.ARPA, decvax!ittvax!hagouel@UCB-VAX.ARPA, DEPhillips@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA, Kaden.BNRRich@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA, Quirk.BNRRich@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA, Sirbu@GAUSS.ECE.CMU.EDU Massachusetts Institute of Technology Communications Forum Making Electronic Mail More Intelligent October 31, 1985 Thomas Malone, MIT Kenneth Mayers, Digital Equipment Corporation Electronic messaging has become a familiar feature of the office environment and a key element in office automation strategy for many organizations. As these systems spread, many issues must be dealt with, such as accomodating evolving user requirements, responding to rapid expansion, controlling junk mail, and incorporating alternative technologies. One of the central challenges is how to enhance messaging features so that users are not swamped by information overload. This forum will present the experience of Digital Equipment Corporation, one of the pioneering users of electronic mail, and will describe some recent innovative research at MIT which uses artificial intelligence technology to improve the user's ability to sort incoming messages by relevance and urgency and to route outgoing communications to the most appropriate people within the organizations. Electronic Media and the First Amendment November 7, 1985 While the First Amendment to the Constitution has been interpreted to grant print publishers nearly unabridged freedom of expression, electronic broadcast media have been regulated on the grounds of "spectrum scarcity." Regulation of cable television has been justified on a number of premises: use of public streets; "natural monopoly" characteristics; and its close relationship to broadcasting. Recently, a number of important court decisions have indicated that cable operators should be treated more like print publishers than broadcasters for First Amendment purposes. One of these decisions struck down the "must carry" rule, which required cable systems to carry all broadcast stations within a certain radius. This seminar will consider the impact of these decisions on both the cable and broadcast industries and, in particular, whether rapidly expanding channel capacity and new delivery technologies undermine traditional justifications for limiting First Amendment rights of the electronic media. The Impact of the Divestiture November 14, 1985 Lisa Rosenblum, New York Public Service Commission, Consumer Division Paul Levy, Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities Gayle Ruedi, AT&T Customer Services/MIT There has been more choice but also more confusion in the telecommunications industry since the breakup of the 107 year-old Bell System last year. Both residential and business users are faced with complex tradeoffs among products, services, and prices -- in a market which is in constant technological flux. State regulatory agencies have found their established practices challenged by the changes climate and have had to reassess what their role should be. The divestiture has had a particularly profound effect on AT&T, which has had to shed its monopoly mindset and establish an image as a "new," competitive company, while reassuring customers that it continues to offer state-of- the-art technology and service. Software Dissemination: First Sale and Shrink-Wrap Licensing November 21, 1985 David Waterman, Annenberg School of Communication, USC Robert Bigelow, Bigelow and Saltzberg Robert McEwen, Boston College Home video technology seemed to promise motion picture studios a new revenue stream from selling movies in the form of a product that consumers would purchase and collect. In practice, the studios found themselves whipsawed by the "first sale" doctrine: If they marketed videocassettes as a product, copies could be rented by retailers without paying royalties. Alternatively, they could pursue a "rental only" strategy -- leasing copies to distributors and retailers, who could then only rent to consumers, returning royalties for each rental. The middlemen resisted "rental only" plans and outright sale prevailed. The studios, in turn, asked Congress to modify the law for audio-visual works. They failed, but the law was amended for sound recordings, which aborted the development of record rental services. Although a bill to modify the first sale doctrine for computer software was introduced in the Senate, software producers have generally sought to characterize retail transactions as licensing agreements. But instead of having dealers rent the software, the industry has relied on "shrink- wrap licenses", which purport to create a lease upon the opening of the package. Are shrink-wrap licenses enforceable? Can they effectively transform sales into leases and goods into services? When should the first sale doctrine apply? This seminar will survey the law and then look at the economic and policy issues. High-Definition Television December 5, 1985 Robert Hopkins, National Association of Broadcasters Kerns Powers, RCA Edward Horowitz, Home Box Office The broadcast television system that has served America for the past thirty years is undergoing revision at all levels. New technologies have been developed that equal or exceed the quality of theatrical film, and the level of effort in research labs and industry has raised the issue of a new standard that will allow high quality world-wide program interchange. One system, designed by NHK in Japan, will have been proposed as a production standard at the October meeting of the CCIR, and the CCIR recommendations will be known by the date of this seminar. The speakers invited will discuss this standard and various other approaches to high quality television. 4:00 - 6:00 Bartos Theater for the Moving Image The Wiesner Building (Center for Arts and Media Technology) (Building E15 Lower Level) 20 Ames Street Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, Massachusetts For further information call 617-253-3144. ------------------------------ To: veeger!hpcnof!hplabs!Human-Nets@red.rutgers.edu Date: Mon, 7 Oct 85 16:30:02 MDT From: Dave Taylor Subject: New (related) mailing list... (I hope no-one minds me using this as a publicity forum, but I think that this is a reasonably like-minded new mailing group starting up that it's worth the overlap - Dave) From: The Computers-and-Society Moderator I'm starting a new mailing list for the express purpose of discussing the ramifications of computers and information on society. The title of this group is "Computers and Society" and among the areas I'd like to see us discuss are: Computers and Social Responsibility Philosophical issues of using computers Psychological barriers to acceptance of computers Why computers are viewed as 'omniscient' (and are they?) How much information is "too much"? How can we deal with information overload? What of non-technically oriented people? Are they getting their fair share of the information available? Are we move towards a classed society: Those that have the information and those that don't? How far is society from the Orwellian vision of 1984? Is the media blowing computers all out of proportion? Is there anything we can do about it? User Interfaces (from the 'outside in', rather than the implementation details - NO PROGRAMS PLEASE!) < and so on > After being on a number of different mailing lists, I've found that the most readable and pleasant form is to 'digest' it and mail a set of messages to the entire membership of the group in digest form. (please see Human-Nets for an example of a "digest form" mailing list) ------------- To join this group, contribute to the discussion, or whatever, please send mail to me at any of the below addresses (please include an address for yourself based on one of the major hubs, like 'ihnp4' or 'decvax'): USENET: ...ihnp4!hpfcla!d_taylor or ...hplabs!hpcnof!dat ARPANET: hpcnou!dat@HPLABS.CSNET-RELAY CSNET: hpcnou!dat@HPLABS Depending on the flow of messages, a digest will be mailed out about once a week (I'll try to keep them managable, though, so if we're on a "roll" it'll increase...). -------------- The first issue of the Computers and Society Digest will be mailed out on or about the 19th of October so keep in touch! -- Dave Taylor ------------------------------ Date: Tue 8 Oct 85 12:20:53-PDT From: Ken Laws Subject: New Digest Service Stay Alert EE's Tools & Toys column, Coordinator M.A. Fischetti IEEE Spectrum, Volume 22, No. 10, 10/85, p. 86 The new monthly Telecommunications Alert, a 16-page newsletter, publishes highly condensed forms of 75 to 85 news items from 220 telecommunications and related publications. The digest highlights breaking developments from telecom newspapers, magazines, newsletters, books, journals, and government reports, identified by name, date, and page number of the source publication, with address and phone number. TA is currently offering a 20% discount on new subscriptions, plus a copy of "The Telecommunication Manager's (Plain-English) Guide to Practical Technologies". [...] A seven-month trial subscription is %89; a full-year subscription is $149. To order or to request more information, write to Telecommunications Alert, One Park Avenue, New York, NY 10157; telephone (800) 221-2618 except in NY state (212) 683-3899. ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: Charles McGrew, The Moderator (Human-Nets-Request@RED.RUTGERS.EDU) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #35 Newsgroups: mod.human-nets Date: 1985-10-22 08:52:00 PST HUMAN-NETS Digest Tuesday, 22 Oct 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 35 Today's Topics: Queries - Foreign Language abstracting & Looking for contacts at Los Alamos NL, Computers and the Law - Slander vs. Libel, Computer Networks - Phone Numbers for EMail Addresses & Voicemail info ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: eugene@AMES-NAS.ARPA (Eugene Miya) Date: 16 Oct 1985 2307-PDT (Wednesday) To: AIlist@berkeley.ARPA, soft-eng@mit-mc.ARPA Subject: Last call for assistance: helping with foreign language Subject: abstracting I would like tothank all of the people who responded for my first call for people to help in the translation/abstraction of foreign language documents. I have been travelling quite a bit during the past five weeks, so next week, I will have a chance to lay the groundwork for determining what journals to monitor and where to post information. For those of you who missed this earlier posting: I am seeking people interested in monitoring foreign language technical documents with an eye to post significant new articles to various bulletin boards. This would be prior to translation, and would hopefully speed translation of potentially significant papers in: AI, graphics, and so forth. Languages which are particularly critical are Eastern Asian: Japanese and Chinese, perhaps French, and other western European languages. We have a few people of each, but it would help to spread the load out. If you are interested, or want to hear more, send me mail to a UUCPnet/ARPAnet gateway listed below. --eugene miya NASA Ames Research Center [Rock of Ages Home for ...] eugene@ames-nas.ARPA UUCP: {ihnp4,hao,hplabs,nsc,cray,research,decwrl}!ames!amelia!eugene ------------------------------ Date: 18 October 85 23:47 EDT From: RMXJ%CORNELLA.BITNET@UCB-VAX.Berkeley.EDU Subject: Looking for contacts at Los Alamos NL I am doing a thesis project on the threat that Japan poses to the United States (Commercially if nothing else) in regards to their continued development of Supercomputers. I was told by a knowledgeable source, that one of the main reasons for the existence of the Office of Advanced Scientific Computing at the National Science Foundation is due to a tour that several scientists made of Japanese Computer Centers sometime (I'm guessing) in the last 5-7 years. These scientists (at that time) were from Los Alamos - I would be very interested in getting in touch with them. If anyone knows who they are and could point a figure at how I could reach them - that would be appreciated. If by any chance, any of those scientists read this message I would appreciate it if you would contact me and finally, if anyone working at LANL who knows the whereabouts of these scientists, if you could contact me that would complete my search. Some more background on my paper: By utilizing historial referents drawn from our experience with Sputnik in 1957, I want to find out if this challenge is "just another Sputnik" or something else. --- Gligor Tashkovich Junior - College of Arts and Sciences Cornell-In-Washington program Home: (202) 822-3924 Work: (202) 357-9776 RMXJ%CORNELLA.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU (or BERKELEY.EDU or BERKELEY.ARPA) ------------------------------ Date: 15 Oct 85 23:47 EDT (Tue) From: _Bob To: Ken Laws Cc: edsel!jim@su-navajo.arpa Subject: Slander vs. Libel From: edsel!jim@su-navajo.arpa (Jim McDonald) wonder if machine-generated speech would be libel or slander, assuming it was one of the two. (Assume also that someone typed in normal sentences, which the machine merely transduced to speech.) I suppose only a lawyer would care... No, the client could still care too. There were some real differences in the kinds of words thought actionable and in the proof of damages required, and some courts would still honor them. There a couple of old radio-broadcast cases that say that words read from a written script are libel, and imply that the same words ad lib would not be. That might support your "typed in normal sentences" theory. But it's almost impossible to have your case dismissed for picking the wrong category now, so I guess that robs this of most of its fun value. From: Ken Laws The answer may depend partly on whether the injured party has the opportunity to respond to the original audience if redress is found appropriate. That sounds sensible, and is one of the underpinnings of Times v. Sullivan (no defamation of a public official without proof of malice), but I don't think it has much to do with the old libel/slander line. _B ------------------------------ Date: Wed 16 Oct 85 09:18:15-PDT From: WYLAND@SRI-KL.ARPA Subject: In Defense of Phone Numbers for EMail Addresses >Date: Mon, 7 Oct 85 13:20 EDT >From: Robert W. Kerns >I will just observe that I keep a list of people's phone #'s (and >several phone books), yet I successfully keep ALL the mail addresses >I use in my head. (With the exception of UUCP routes, of course). >How many phone numbers do YOU remember? >People adapt to numbers because they must, not because it is easy. I remember many more phone numbers than mail addresses. Perhaps this is because I use the phone more often than I write or because: 555-1212 is easier to remember than: 1234 Somewhere Drive, Apt 23 Wherever, CA 00000 If I forget the phone number, I can call information and restore it. If I forget the mail address, I usually wind up *calling my friend and asking for his address* (and calling information if I have lost his phone number also.). A phone number does not have any deep social/psychological dehumanizing significance per se: it's only a phone number. Phone numbers *should* be more natural EMail addresses, since EMail is computers communicating over *phone lines*. The way many people get into an EMail system is by *calling a computer* and switching over to a modem. The only thing that is really missing in the EMail system is a good directory and information service. If anyone could get an EMail phone directory listing all the people on all the nets along with their phone numbers (or number that will wake up a modem) and their associated net-name, I think many problems would be solved. This approach is partly implemented by the ARPA Net directory, for example. An information number (like the phone company's XXX-555-1212) could be implemented these days in the form of a 976 number with an appropriate charge. The ideal "information number" would be an on-line directory available through anyone's net , of course. (The problem is to get paid for each access to support the system.) A directory service could be launched by a separate company if several of the major networks would agree to contribute the EMail addresses of their members. Each member would have to have the option of having their EMail address be unlisted - in the same manner as the phone system - or of having a REPLY-TO address different than their login address, etc. The phone number approach has one advantage: it is already implicitly in use. You are using the phone system to read talk to the net and read this message. A good directory should solve the problem of sending EMail to someone whose EMail address you forgot. Unless I am mistaken, this is the only problem that has been clearly identified. Dave Wyland ------------------------------ Date: Monday, 21 Oct 1985 17:57:52-PDT From: minow%rex.DEC@decwrl.DEC.COM From: (Martin Minow, DECtalk Engineering ML3-1/U47 223-9922) Subject: Voicemail info follow-up Notes on early voice processing systems. Disclaimer Patent 4,371,752, filed Nov. 26, 1979, issued Feb. 1, 1983, (the VMX patent) claims to cover voice-mail systems. The reader should not assume that information in this note disputes those claims. There are two main early research efforts in the voice-processing field: the Arpa real-time voice project and the IBM Voice Filing System. There are also a number of smaller efforts. 1 THE ARPA REAL-TIME VOICE PROJECT The ARPAnet is a digital packet-switched network that connects a number of computers doing government (Defense Department) sponsored work. In a report "Evolution of the ARPAnet", published in 1981 by E. J. Feinler of SRI, The network voice protocol is described as follows: "The Network Voice Protocol (NVP) was implemented in 1973 and has been in use since then for realtime voice communication over the ARPANET [Cohen, D. Specifications for the Network Voice Protocol (NVP), RFC 741, NIC 42444, Nov. 22, 1977, pp 43-88 IN: ARPANET Protocol Handbook, NIC 7104, Network Information Center, SRI International, Menlo Park CA, rev. Jan 1978.]. The protocol was developed by a group headed by the University of Southern California, Informatin Sciences Institute (ISI), as part of ARPA's Network Secure Communications (NSC) project. The goal of this project was to demonstrate a digital, high-quality, low-bandwidth, secure voice handling capability across the ARPANET. The protocol has been used successfully for experiments between ISI, BBN, SRI, MIT'S Lincoln Laboratory (MIT-LL), Culler-Harrison, Incl, and the Speech Communications Research Lab, Inc." Packetized voice was first tranmitted in 1974 with point-to-point connections, and in 1975 with conference connections. A prototype voice message system was implemented at ISI in 1978. This was integrated into the user's work environment, rather than "just" a computer-based answering machine. I do not know whether the ISI voice message system was integrated into the public telephone network. The ARPA voice project is discussed in two papers: Cohen, D., "A voice message system," in R. P. Uhlig (ed.), Computer Message Systems, pp. 17-27, North-Holland, 1981. Gold, Bernard (invited paper), "Digital Speech Networks", Proc. IEEE Vol. 65, No. 12, Dec. 1977. 2 THE IBM VOICE FILING SYSTEM (These notes are from a collegue's trip-report, dated Sep. 12, 1978). At COMPCON 78 (September, 1978), Steve Boise, Manager of the Voice Filing System project at IBM, Yorktown Heights, gave a presentation. There are six people on the project. it was started five years ago (i.e. in 1973). Three of them are psychologists, three computer types. They considered this the first step toward an integrated office information system. The project is aimed toward providing direct support to office principals (i.e., not secretaries or other support people). (Note: the COMPCON proceedings do not appear to have an abstract or paper on the IBM system.) Boise's project is an audio correspondence system. "Correspondence" refers to non-interactive communications, those not requiring people to get together at the same time. IBM has had a system in use, at an experimental level, for 2 1/2 years (i.e., since 1976). it uses a System 7 for real-time control, and a 370/168 as a time-shared host. The main purpose of the 168 is for mass storage. They use 2 hours of CPU time per month. There is 1 Mbyte of "on line" storage, and 800 Mbytes in "MSS" (archival storage?). Users access the system by dialing in from any touch-tone phone. Boise gave a demo of the actual system. All control for the system is by touch-tone. Audio input is used only for message content. The user can originate messages, transmit them (using touch-tone keys to specify addresses), listen to his own mail, and several other functions. The system automatically eliminates any long pauses from messages. This has had the unanticipated benifit of practically eliminating "mike fright". Users don't have to worry about pausing when deciding what to say. The system also uses some other tricks to speed up playback without altering voice quality. Typically, 50 wpm recording becomes 150 wpm on playback. Another unintended result is that recordings sound much more as if the person knows what he is talking about. You can record a message, and specify it to be delivered at some future time. The computer will call up the addressee and tell him about the message. It can try several different numbers, and will call back later if no answer. If you go away, you can leave a forwarding number. Users can file mail if they desire. Retrieval can be by originator, dates, and classification -- all under touch-tone control. Messages are automatically erased from the mailbox after two weeks, if they have been read at least once. Users like this feature as it frees them from having to worry about disposing of old mail. File protection concepts are built in. Every message has an owner. Several levels of access are possible: read-only, read and forward, read, append, and forward. There are also several "classifications": unclassified, personal, and confidential. You can check if someone has read the mail you sent him. Other status information is also available, such as whether he has logged in today, etc. You can also record a message to be read to anyone who asks about you. So, for example, if you are out of town for a week, you can leave a message saying so. The system provides extensive editing facilities which are mostly unused as the users think they are too complex. The system is heavily instrumented. The implementors know which features are used, and how much. They know every command that has been given on the system (but not message content). The real issue is building a good "principal interface". You must make the entry cost to the principal very low. The system uses lots of (audio) prompting an dmultiple-choice responses. To start using the system, there are only seven touch-tone commands to learn. Commands use the touch-tone letters as mnemonics, e.g., *R means "record". There is a "help" facility. The " " key, followed by any other key tells what that key will do. References for the IBM system include the following: Gould, J. D., and Boies, S. J. "Speech filing -- an office system for Principals." IBM Systems Journal, Vol 23, No. 1, 1984. pp. 65-81. (Also IBM Res. REp. RC-9769, Dec. 1982). Gould, J. D., and Boies, S. J. "Human factors challenges in creating a principal support office system -- The Speech Filing System Approach." ACM Trans. on Office Info. Systems, Vol. 1, No. 4, October 1983, pp. 273-298. The following were referenced by the above papers. I haven't seen them at this time. Boies, S. J. "A computer based audio communication system," AIIIE Conference on Automating Business Communications, (January 23-25, 1978), pp. 369-372. (Paper can be obtained from Management Education Corporation (MEC), Box 3727, Santa Monica, CA 90403.) Zeheb, D. and Boies, S. J. "Speech filing migration system," in H. Inose (Editor), Proceedings of the International Conference of Computer Communication (September 1978), pp. 571-574. IBM Audio Distribution System Subscriber's Guide, SC34-0400-1, IBM Corporation, 4111 Northside Parkway N.W., Box 2150, Atlanta, GA 30056; also available from IBM branch offices. 3 OTHER WORK (NOT NECESSARILY VOICE-MAIL) A number of companies produced systems for audio-response applications where a customer could retreive information stored on a computer by using a Touch-tone (tm) telephone. Survey articles were published in Datamation (1969) and by Datapro (September 1976). These systems used prerecorded human speech to produce messages with limited content. The misdial message "the number you have dialed, 555-1212, is not in service..." is produced by a similar system. Delphi Communications (part of Exxon information systems) was founded to do voice messaging. Computalker Consultants (Santa Monica, CA) developed hardware for speech synthesis (connected to microcomputers using the S100 bus architecture). The Computalker CT1) could not be directly connected to the public telephone network. Rice, D. L. "Friends, humans, and countryrobots: lend me your ears", Byte, Number 12, August 1976. Rice, D. L. "Speech Synthesis by a set of rules (or can a set of rules speak English?)", Proceedings of the First West Coast Computer Faire, San Francisco, 1977. Rice, D. L. "Hardware and software for speech synthesis", Dr. Dobbs Journal, April 1976. Votrax (Troy Michigan) developed hardware for phonemic synthesis that could be connected to any computer that supported Ascii text (RS232 asychronous port) and could connect to a Bell 407 -- and hence to the public telephone system. Systems using the Votrax and Bell 407 were developed at Bell Labs by M. D. McIlroy to do unrestricted text-to-speech conversion. This allowed directory-assistance applicications to be implemented on a Unix (version 6) system. The software was available under license from Bell Laboratories in 1978 (or earlier). By connecting the text-to-speech software to to standard Unix utilities using the "pipe" mechanism, voice mail and computer-generated broadcast messages ("Time for lunch!") could be easily implemented. Using the same hardware, Lauren Weinstein implemented a "Touch-tone Unix" interface at UCLA. Using this hardware, and suggestions from Lauren Weinstein, I implemented a Touch-tone RSTS/E system at the Dec Research and Development group. It was shown publicly at Canada Decus, February 26-29, 1980. Posted: Mon 21-Oct-1985 16:53 Maynard Time. Martin Minow MLO3-3/U8, DTN 223-9922 To: RHEA::DECWRL::"human-nets@rutgers.arpa", RHEA::DECWRL::"telecom@mit-xx.arpa" ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: Charles McGrew, The Moderator (Human-Nets-Request@RED.RUTGERS.EDU) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #36 Newsgroups: mod.human-nets Date: 1985-11-24 23:27:06 PST HUMAN-NETS Digest Thursday, 7 Nov 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 36 Today's Topics: Queries - Red Checks? & Banking Privacy of Paper, Computers and People - Mice vs. trackball vs light pens vs..., Computer Networks - Email Addressing (2 msgs), Computers and the Law - Libel and Slander ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Return-path: Date: 2-NOV-1985 15:22:02 From: ECON35%vax1.oxford.ac.uk@ucl-cs.arpa Do you know anything about sending electronic mail containing mathematical and other symbols? I know of several methods, but is there a standard, if only a de facto one? Thanks.... Hunter Monroe ECON35@UK.AC.OX.VAX1 ------------------------------ Return-path: <@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA,@ucf.CSNET:tanner@ki4pv.uucp> From: tanner <@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA,@ucf.CSNET:tanner@ki4pv.uucp> Subject: Banking Privacy of Paper Date: Tue Nov 5 15:50:12 1985 I remember some years ago some discussion of the matter of having cheques printed on red paper, as this was supposed to cause the bank's copies of them to turn out all black and thus unreadable when the feds come in to see who writes cheques to what. This was offered as the reason that cheques are not available on red paper from the banks. Do the banks still use this sort of film? If so, is there an outfit somewhere that will print cheques on red paper? What is the best shade of red for this purpose? tanner andrews note: the return address generated for this message is almost assuredlyincorrect. try one of the following; it will probably work: (uucp) {decvax | akgua}!ucf-cs!ki4pv!tanner (csnet) ki4pv!tanner@ucf-cs (arpanet) ki4pv!tanner%ucf-cs@csnet-relay ------------------------------ Return-path: Date: Wed 30 Oct 85 16:52:19-EST From: CZAJKOWSKI@TL-20B.ARPA Subject: pointers to/copies of mice vs. trackball vs light pens vs. Subject: .... Many months ago the hardware user-interface dilemmas of mice versus trackballs versus light pens versus touch screens versus some other things raged mightily on human-nets. Has anyone archived a) any pointers to relevant published materials on the subject, b) any relevant messages from the human-nets monologues and dialogues or c) the particular digests that the debates ran in? I would greatly appreciate pointers to and/or copies of such things. Please mail to me directly; I don't always make it through all of the digests all of the time. Thanks muchly, Czajkowski@Tartan.arpa ------------------------------ Return-path: Date: Thu, 24 Oct 85 10:25:35 pdt From: mikes@AMES-NAS.ARPA (Peter Mikes) Subject: Re: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #35 Re: email addresses - phone-numbers and collective idiocy The phone numbers are unsuitable for e-mail adresses becouse they are area dependent. Addresses should have one to one correspodence with people, they should not change when I move, go to vacation or start working on a different computer, for a different company or in different domain ( GOV, EDU..) So - most of the addressing schemes used are manifestation of the EDSEL spirit which is pervading the computer and telecommunication industry today. Perhaps closest to a reasonable scheme are MCI email addresses and before we proceed, explain what is wrong with those. Any practical system will collect the adresses of people who ever wrote to me in my personal directory - perhaps with dates/ Re,.. etc so that I can mail to any of them with a click of a mouse. It will allow me to to add to that directory from special purpose subdirectories -- There is some 10 to power of ten people around and so it would have little sense to have a comprehensive directories. Email must allow one to see the listof "people within 25 mikes radius, who currently selling a used chevy vagen' as a part of the adressing scheme and allow me to add them /temporarily/ to my mailing list /possibly as group alias/ as long as such request is compatible with the privacy constrain which THEY place on their own profile.... It is really fairly simple problem - too bad that nobody is thinking about it.: ------------------------------ Return-path: Date: 25 October 85 11:25 EDT From: RMXJ%CORNELLA.BITNET@ucb-vax.berkeley.edu Subject: (copy) Phone Numbers for Email Addressing Originally sent from: RMXJ@CORNELLA Originally sent to: WYLAND@SRI-KL.ARPA Another problem with this idea is that there are very few people who do not share a phone (at either home or work with either secretaries or family) with others. So, granted, the network could get it to that number, but how about the issue of privacy and/or security. Presumably, there would just be one account per phone number, right? -- Gligor Tashkovich RMXJ @ CORNELLA.BITNET RMXJ%CORNELLA.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU (or BERKELEY.EDU) ------------------------------ Return-path: Date: Thu, 7 Nov 85 11:13:13 EST From: decvax!sunybcs!colonel@ucbvax.berkeley.edu (Col. G. L. From: Sicherman) Subject: Re: libel and slander (V8, #3) The difficulty of extending the libel/slander distinction has been treated at length in a series of case reports by A. P. Herbert in the British law journal _Punch._ Herbert's reports have been published in book form as _Modern Misleading Cases in the Common Law,_ etc. I recommend them to anybody who believes in trying to extend outmoded distinctions to modern communications media. ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************


From: Charles McGrew, The Moderator (Human-Nets-Request@RED.RUTGERS.EDU) Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V8 #38 Newsgroups: mod.human-nets Date: 1986-01-05 23:06:54 PST HUMAN-NETS Digest Thursday, 19 Dec 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 38 Today's Topics: Computers and the Law - The 10 Most Wanted Fugitives, Computers and People - The "Hacker" Game (3 msgs) & Computer Etiquette ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Return-path: Date: 3 Dec 85 00:10 PST From: William Daul / McDonnell-Douglas / APD-ASD From: Subject: "10 Most Wanted Fugitives" FROM COMPUTERWORLD (Dec 2?) Washington, D.C. -- Biographies and digitial pictures of fugitives who appear on the Federal Bureau of Investigation's "10 Most Wanted Fugitives" list are now available on the Compuserve Information Service, from Compuserve, Inc. of Columbus, Ohio. Compuserve and FBI officials worked together to produce the online service, hoping it will turn up some clues that will lead to the apprehension of the fugitives. "Many of our subscribers are professionals such as doctors, lawyers and dentists. Like everyone else, the fugitives require the use of their services. In addition, many of these fugitives have distinct scars, tatoos and limps ... so alert subscribers may spot one of them," according to a Compuserve spokesman. ------------------------------ Return-path: Date: Sat, 23 Nov 85 11:28:22 EST From: "Keith F. Lynch" Subject: Hacker game To: BEC.SHAPIN@USC-ECL.ARPA Cc: risks@SRI-CSL.ARPA Date: Mon 18 Nov 85 11:54:52-PST From: Ted Shapin Activision HACKER Makes you feel like you've unlocked someone else's computer system! ... This "product" is socially irresponsible! It leads young people to think breaking into unknown systems is OK. The "world" they discover may be the world of the penal system! I don't see what's wrong with this. This is better than cracking for real, and I doubt that anyone will learn any useful cracking techniques from this game. Do you also think that toy guns should be banned? What about Adventure, Zork, and Dungeons and Dragons, which teach people to kill and to steal? I think fantasy role playing games are of great benefit. They give people of all ages a chance to 'get it out of their system' in a harmless way. ...Keith ------------------------------ Return-path: Date: Sat 23 Nov 85 13:28:39-CST From: Werner Uhrig Subject: is game similating security of *REAL* machines? Subject: (Re: Irresponsible) To: BEC.SHAPIN@USC-ECL.ARPA Cc: risks@SRI-CSL.ARPA I wouldn't be surprised if this game actually simulates the security features (or lack thereof) of some real-life systems ... ... in which case, it's *REALLY* time to be alarmed. On the other hand, this just might cause a lot of sites to decide to pay attention to improving their security, or cause efforts which advance the state of the art of security, which wouldn't be that bad, when you think about it. has someone with access to the game and knowledge of the security features of different minis/mainframes checked this out yet? ------------------------------ Return-path: Date: Mon 2 Dec 85 10:34:02-PST From: Ted Shapin Subject: Re: is game similating security of *REAL* machines? Subject: (Re: Irresponsible) To: CMP.WERNER@R20.UTEXAS.EDU Cc: risks@SRI-CSL.ARPA No, I heard the game is a maze type game, not a simulation of security on any real system. The advertisement is just hype to sell the game. Ted. ------------------------------ Return-path: Subject: Try again Date: 15 Dec 85 09:54:01 GMT (Sun) From: Steve Kille [Ed. Note: Due to the rather convoluted forwarding path of this message, I have included all forwarding information.] ---- Forwarded Message ---- From: Peter Lloyd (on ICF GEC 4090 at Cardiff) From: Date: Wed, 4 Dec 85 19:25 GMT Subject: Electronic mail etiquette ----- Start of forwarded message. Date: Wed 4 Dec 85 14:38:11-GMT From: Alan Greig Subject: Mailgroup messages To: mailgroup@UK.AC.Ucl.Cs Snail-Mail: Computer Centre/Dundee College of Tech/Dundee/Scotland Sender: mailgroup-request@UK.AC.Ucl.Cs This appeared in the New York Times a year or so ago and I think went out on usenet. I apologise in advance if you don't think it has any relevance but considering the recent comments about the quality of mailgroup, well it seems relevant to me. Oh by the way I have my fire extinguisher at the ready... Alan /* TOP */ [From The New York Times, Tuesday, October 2, 1984, p. C1] EMOTIONAL OUTBURSTS PUNCTUATE CONVERSATIONS BY COMPUTER by Erik Eckholm Computer buffs call it "flaming." Now scientists are documenting and trying to explain the surprising prevalence of rudeness, profanity, exultation and other emotional outbursts by people when they carry on discussions via computer. The frequent resort to emotional language is just one of several special traits of computer communications discovered by behavioral scientists studying how this new medium affects the message. Observing both experimental groups and actual working environments, scientists at Carnegie-Mellon University are comparing decision-making through face-to-face discussions with that conducted electronically. In the experiments, in addition to calling each other more names and generally showing more emotion, people "talking" by computer took longer to agree, and their final decisions tended to be more extreme, involving either greater or lesser risk than the more middle-of-the-road decisions reached by groups meeting in person. Curiously, those who made such decisions through electronic give-and-take believed more strongly in the rightness of their choices. As small computers proliferate in offices and homes, more business discussions that were once pursued face-to-face, by telephone or on paper are now taking place by way of keyboards and video display terminals. With electronic mail, messages are left in a central computer for reading by correspondents on their own computers at their own convenience. Computer conferences can be carried on simultaneously or not. In some offices, observers say, the traditional typed memorandum is all but extinct, and computer mail is replacing even telephone calls. Employees in one corporation studied received or sent an average of 24 computer messages a day. The unusual characteristics showing up in computer communications should not be seen as entirely negative, say the researchers. When it is not insulting, language that is uninhibited and informal helps to bridge social barriers and may help to draw out some people's ideas. And more extreme decisions can be innovative and creative instead of foolish. Moreover, members of groups talking electronically tend to contribute much more equally to the discussion. "This is unusual group democracy," said Dr. Sara Kiesler, a psychologist at Carnegie-Mellon. "There is less of a tendency for one person to dominate the conversation, or for others to defer to the one with the highest status." LOOSER STANDARDS FOR DISCUSSIONS Studies of electronic mail is several Fortune 500 corporations have confirmed the tendency for people to use more informal and expressive language on the computer than when communicating in person, by telephone or by memo. "Whatever the company's pre-existing standards for the expression of opinion, electronic mail seems to loosen them," Dr. Lee Sproull, a sociologist at Carnegie-Mellon, said in an interview, But in contrast with the experimental findings, in the corporate world positive emotional expressions greatly outnumbered negative ones. The company studies also indicate that computers are permitting much wider participation in discussions than in the past, with employees far from headquarters now able to follow debates and make their views known. Unusually expressive language has been one of the most striking characteristics of computer discussions studied in many different contexts. "It's mazing," said Dr. Kiesler. "We've seen messages sent out by managers -- messages that will be seen by thousands of people -- that use language normally heard in locker rooms." COMPUTER BULLETIN BOARDS The frequent use of exuberant and offensive terms has long been noted by observers of computer bulletin boards. In 1982 the Defense Communications Agency, which manages the world's oldest and largest computer network for use by Pentagon employees and contractors, issued the following message to potential bulletin board contributors: "Due to past problems with messages deemed in bad taste by 'the authorities,' messages sent to this address are manually screened (generally, every couple of days) before being remailed to the Boards." Struggling to explain the free-wheeling language that people use on computers, the Carnegie-Mellon scientists note that electronic communications convey none of the non-verbal cues of personal conversation -- the eye contact, facial expressions and voice inflections that provide social feedback and my inhibit extreme behavior. Even a memo, with its letterhead and chosen form, carries more nonverbal information than does a message on a screen. Also, no strong rules of etiquette for computer conversation have yet evolved. Computer writers often become deeply engrossed in their message, the researchers have found, but their focus tends to be on the text itself rather than their audience, perhaps another consequence of the lack of non-verbal feedback. In a forthcoming paper, Dr. Kiesler and three colleagues posit that "using computers to communicate draws attention to the technology and to the content of communication and away from people and relationships with people." /* BOTTOM */ ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************