text
stringlengths
1
160k
label
class label
20 classes
In article <NEILSON.93Apr15135919@seoul.mpr.ca> neilson@seoul.mpr.ca (Robert Neilson) writes: >[sorry for the 0 auto content, but ... ] > >> That is why low-abiding citizens should have the power to protect themselves >> and their property using deadly force if necessary anywhere a threat is >> imminent. >> >> Steve Heracleous > >You do have the power Steve. You *can* do it. Why don't you? Why don't you >go shoot some kids who are tossing rocks onto cars? Make sure you do a good >job though - don't miss - 'cause like they have big rocks - and take it from >me - those kids are mean. As a stong self-defense advocate, you're 'statement', does littel but irk me. Of course shooting someone because they throw a rock at your car is out of the question, but what if they disabled your car with their rock and then wanted to come kill/rape/rob/beat/ or otherwise harm you, your wife, kids? I think you would like the power to defend yourself in this situation, wouldn't you? Or is it that you value the lives of such rock throwers more than your own or those of your family? Don't think it couldn't happen to you. From the sounds of it here it has happened to a few people. Please do not misunderstand. The only justification for using deadly force on someone, is that if you don't, it will mean your own death or grave bodily harm. I am far far away from supporting vilante justice or anything like that.. Oh, and if you mean to be funny, please add the appropriate :-) Followups to talk.politics.guns please... we're getting a bit off track here.... ------- Steve Syck syck5280@miller.cs.uwm.edu --------
7rec.autos
In article <lsm9htINNfpj@appserv.Eng.Sun.COM> fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix) writes: <In article <C5AnHH.K2u@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes: <>wdstarr@athena.mit.edu (William December Starr) writes: <> <>There was a long standing belief held in the USA at one time <>that the US Military Should NOT become involved in the internal <>policing of the Country. Under The Reagan/Bush Legacy this basic <>tenant of the Military as being "out of the criminal enforcement loop" <>was suspended, put in mothballs, made a NonOperableTruth. < <Ignoring the National Guard or state militias being called out to <deal with mine strikers and the like...didn't the army get called in <during the '20s to deal with a bunch of WW1 veterans who came out to <protest the government's (mis)handling of their rights? < <Somebody named MacArthur ran the field end of the operation. Wasn't that the 'Bonus Rebellion', when tanks were deployed against US Citizens? Grist for those who insist 'It couldn't happen here...' -- pat@rwing.uucp [Without prejudice UCC 1-207] (Pat Myrto) Seattle, WA If all else fails, try: ...!uunet!pilchuck!rwing!pat WISDOM: "Only two things are infinite; the universe and human stupidity, and I am not sure about the former." - Albert Einstien
18talk.politics.misc
OK... I've done a little research and the price I've been asking was a BIT high. So... Casio CZ-101 Synthesizer $125 or best offer Features: uses FM modulation to create sounds -- programmable ADSR envelopes for each of 2 DCA's (amplitude), 2 DCW's (pitch, like a VCF), and 2 DCO's (waveform, like VCO) with up to 8 steps for each 16 preset sounds, 8 more in memory, 8 more still in RAM cartridge. 49 stubby keys Pitch Bend Wheel MIDI in/out ports Includes: All the manuals you could ever want AC adapter (can use 6 D batteries) Line cord 1 RAM cartridge -- holds 8 additional sounds I'll throw in a bunch of sheet music and "Play Rock Keyboards" too. -- -----------------------------+------------------------------------------------ Christopher Holmes | Do not insert this email in the ear canal. Terminals Development Group | My evil twin blew up the World Trade Center Data General Corporation | and all I got was this stupid .sig file! Westboro, MA | Internet: holmes@mrx.webo.dg.com
6misc.forsale
In article <1993Apr15.182206.12714@reed.edu> especkma@reed.edu (Erik. A Speckman) writes: >In the MacUser article on the new centris and quadra machines mentioned >that the C650 and the Q800, and not the C610, had ROM accelerated video. > >What is it? I don't recall seeing it in Dale Adams post. of course it was in Dale's post, just not in the words that MacUser used. ROM accelerated video just means that some quickdraw commands has been rewritten (inside the ROM) to take advantage of the 68040 addressing modes. commands that do fills should be slightly faster since the new instructions fetch 2 bytes at a time versus one.
4comp.sys.mac.hardware
In article <20APR199319243244@venus.cc.hollandc.pe.ca>, white@venus.cc.hollandc.pe.ca (Take me Baby!) writes: > > Today at the World Championships in Munich, Canada scored an > impressive 3-1 victory over the defending World Champs, Sweden. In the game *I* have seen yesterday in the Olympiahalle of Munich Canada won 4-1 against Sweden! The last goal for Canada was at 19:59 in the 3rd period. Maybe you shouldn't go and get you another beer before the game is over and then post imaginary results... Holger -- S I E M E N S Holger Ohlwein AP153 Otto-Hahn-Ring 6 8000 Muenchen 83 ------------- Tel: + 49 (89) 636-3746 Email: holger.ohlwein@ap.mchp.sni.de N I X D O R F Never put off till tomorrow what you can avoid all together.
10rec.sport.hockey
I have an old tandon type modem (that's all the info I have apart from the fact that it is black!). Does anyone have any info about this modem or upgrading it ??? Reply by e-mail please to cdw@dcs.ed.ac.uk. =============================================================================== = Chris - E-mail: cdw@dcs.ed.ac.uk or C.Walton@ed or p92019@cplab.ph.ed.ac.uk = = Tel.: 031-667-9764 or 0334-74244 (at weekends) = = Write: 4/2 Romero Place, Edinburgh, EH16 5BJ. = =============================================================================== Finagle's Fourth Law: Once a job is fouled up, anything done to improve it only makes it worse. =============================================================================== -- =============================================================================== = Chris - E-mail: cdw@dcs.ed.ac.uk or C.Walton@ed or p92019@cplab.ph.ed.ac.uk = = Tel.: 031-667-9764 or 0334-74244 (at weekends) = = Write: 4/2 Romero Place, Edinburgh, EH16 5BJ. =
3comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
In article <1938@tecsun1.tec.army.mil>, riggs@descartes.etl.army.mil (Bill Riggs) writes: > My mother-in-law, who grew up in Germany, doesn't believe in >money at all. She started out as a real estate developer, and now raises >horses. She keeps telling me that inflation is coming back, and to lock >in my fixed rate mortgage as low as possible. If time is really hard, can a bank selectively call in some mortgage loans early? What if the bank folds, can its creditors call in the loans?
18talk.politics.misc
I plan to post a summary of responses to this as soon as I have working code, which I will also include. The intersection of 3 planes method looks best, but my implementation based on a short article in Graphics Gems I doesn't work. I may be misinterpreting, of course. I had avoided the simultaneous solution of the plane equations in favor of dot and cross products, but the former may actually be better. In either case a matrix determinant needs to be computed (implicitly in the solution of linear equations). To get the planes, I was taking the midpoint of the line from, say, P1 to P2, and setting the normal as the "normalized" vector from P1 to P2. These just plugged into the formula in Graphics Gems. HOwever, the resulting center point is only occasionally equidistant from all 4 of my test points (for different tests). My matrix/vector math is very rusty, but it looks like I need to verify the formula, or use the simultaneous equation solution, which will require bringing in another routine I don't have (but should be easy to find). Another method is to first find the center of the circle defined by 2 sets of 3 points, and intersecting the normals from there. This would also define the circle center. However, small numerical imprecisions would make the lines not intersect. Supposedly 3 planes HAVE to intersect in a unique point if they are not parallel. Ed Thanks to all who answered so far. -- Ed Bolson University of Washington Cardiovascular Research (206)543-4535 bolson@u.washington.edu (preferred) bolson@max.bitnet bolson@milton.u.washington.edu (if you must)
1comp.graphics
> > > Motif managers take a very simplistic approach to the way they handle events > > for gadgets: they track for all events(such as Motion Notify) wether or not > > the gadget expresses interest in the events. As a result, gadgets typically > > generate a great deal more network traffic. Those with X terminals might find > > a noticable network performance drop as a result. > > > > Really? What's the point using Gadgets then? > > It is a case of memory vs. network performance tradeoff. Gadgets > save both client and server memory. But memory is easily expandable while > network performance is not, so if I were designing Motif I would > at least make it *possible* to avoid using gadgets. At present you > really don't have a choice because Motif forces you to use gadgets > in menus and in various other places. > > Adrian Nye > O'Reilly and Associates, Inc. I've been using the XmGraph widget that's been floating around and I noticed the performance is significantly better using Gadgets, perhaps even 100% faster. I had heard in an old programming course that gadgets were no longer any benefit to performance, and that it's just as well to use widgets everywhere. So why would ~50 pushbutton gadgets be a lot quicker than 50 pushbuttons in the graph? Should I start putting gadgets back into my long pulldown menus? XmGraph manages children connected by XmArc widgets in a directed network type graph with automatic layout capability. Bill --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Schlumberger Geco-Prakla Internet : kayser@delft.sgp.slb.com
5comp.windows.x
Does anybody have informations about the W 86 C 451 and W 86 C 456 chips (40pin DIL pckg)? They are build in a multifunction io-card for pc. Thanks Dirk -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Dirk Junghanns junghanns@rz.tu-ilmenau.de ------------------------------------------------------------
12sci.electronics
gtoal@gtoal.com (Graham Toal) writes: >Can someone tell me if hardware compression is or is not needed to run >digital speech down 14.4K? I think it is; I've heard it's not. Lets >say 8 bit samples. Would *raw* data at the corresponding sampling rate >be usable? If not, how fancy does the compression need to be? Note: I am *not* a cable freak, so I might have completely misunderstood what you said. Also, my math is frequently noted for being wrong, so you'll better check the calculations yourself. I assume that 14.4K means 14.4K Bits. So if we assume one start and one stopbit, and no protocol overhead, the effective number of bytes per second is 1.44K. Let's also assume that you do not want to transmit your speech in stereo, so that you can send 1,440 samples/sec. This corresponds to a Nyquist frequency of 720 Hz, which should be too low, especially if you think about the 8-bit low quality sound. Furthermore, your D/A converter will probably not present you with a signal that has been cut off at 720 Hz, but will instead alias in all the higher frequencies. (Although you can definitely build a filter to overcome that problem.) On the other hand, speech should be easily compressible. For example, you could form power spectra, or you could simply band-pass filter and then linearize the fourier transforms. It won't be CD quality sound, but it'll be discernible. The power spectrum method is very good in that respect. I have once programmed such a software compressor, and compression rates of 90% with relative errors due to linearization of less than 5% were common. Although I must say that these were musical sounds, not speech. Have fun. -- Stephan <neuhaus@informatik.uni-kl.de> sig closed for inventory. Please leave your pickaxe outside. PGP 2.2 public key available on request. Note the expiration date.
11sci.crypt
Didn't the new study asked "have you engaged in homosexual intercourse within the last two years" whereas Kinsey asked "have you ever engaged or thought about engaging in homosexual activity". Sort of like the difference between "did you have yogurt this morning" and "are you allergic to lactose". -- -- Michal ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Impressive amounts of material can be accreted in this manner.
18talk.politics.misc
In article <C5JoDH.9IG@news.Hawaii.Edu> lady@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Lee Lady) writes: > >Furthermore, the big bucks approach to science promotes what I think is >one of the most significant errors in science: choosing to investigate >questions because they can be readily handled by the currently >fashionable methodology (or because one can readily get institutional >or corporate sponsorship for them) instead of directing attention to >those questions which seem to have fundamental significance. Shades of James Watson! That's exactly the way many workers have described their misgivings about the Human Genome Project. If you take a rigid definition of scientific research, the mere accumulation of data is not doing science. One of the early arguments against the project were that the resources would be better used to focus on specific genetics-related problems rather than just going off and collecting maps and sequence. The project can't be so narrowly defined or easily described now though.
13sci.med
In article <1993Apr30.011157.12995@news.columbia.edu> ph14@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Pei Hsieh) writes: >Hi -- sorry if this is a FAQ, but are there any conversion utilities >available for Autodesk *.DXF to Amiga *.IFF format? I >checked the comp.graphics FAQ and a number of sites, but so far >no banana. Please e-mail. > >Thanks. > > _______ Pei Hsieh > (_)===(_) e-mail: ph14@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu > ||||| "There's no such thing as a small job; just small fees." > ||||| - anon., on being an architect Hei Pei. I can not help you directly width you problem, but there may be intermediate roads to take to get to the IFF. I am using a converter that can take IGES, IIF, DXF -> IGES, MILESPEC I IGES, MILESPEC II IGES, IIF, MILESPEC I IIF, MILESPEC II IIF and DXF. IIF is IBM IGES FORMAT. There may be converters out there that can handle IGES to IFF. Hope this was to any help. By the way the converter is part of the IGES Processor/6000 package from IBM and it runs on RS/6000 AIX. Best regard Finn Chr. Lundbo IBM Bergen Environmental Sciences & Solutions Centre. E-mail: finn@bsc.no
1comp.graphics
In article <kmr4.1576.734879396@po.CWRU.edu> kmr4@po.CWRU.edu (Keith M. Ryan) writes: #In article <1qj9gq$mg7@horus.ap.mchp.sni.de> frank@D012S658.uucp (Frank O'Dwyer) writes: # #>Is good logic *better* than bad? Is good science better than bad? # # By definition. True enough. O.K., in the universe we have today, which is better, a science that predicts the motion of the planets, and it happens so, or a science which predicts that sonic the hedgehog will record an album with Elvis on a certain date, and it doesn't happen? Can the answer to this question be called objective, or is it a matter of opinion? -- Frank O'Dwyer 'I'm not hatching That' odwyer@sse.ie from "Hens", by Evelyn Conlon
19talk.religion.misc
In article <Apr.14.03.08.18.1993.5458@athos.rutgers.edu> bassili@cs.arizona.edu (Amgad Z. Bassili) writes: > >I appreciate if anyone can point out some good books about the dead sea >scrolls of Qumran. Thanks in advance. > >Please reply by e-mail at <bassili@cs.arizona.edu> Ok boys & girls, hang on; here we go! Christ's Eternal Gospel Robinson & Robinson The Dead Sea Scrolls & the NT WS LaSor James the Just in Habakkuk Pesher RH Eisenman Maccabees ... Quamran RH Eisenman Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered Eisenman & Wise Dead Sea Scrolls Deception Baigent & Leigh Jesus & Riddle of Dead Sea Scrolls B Thiering Jesus Scroll D Joyce Happy Reading & welcome aboard A poor Wayfaring Stranger [some say, a Strange One] in a strange land, +---------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Disclaimer: Not my employer's opinion; probably | | not your's either; and | | only mine, when authorized! | | | | Try: Roger_Holfeltz@stortek.com | +---------------------------------------------------------------------+ [Note that this list covers quite a variety of views. As such it's probably a good one. But if you want to read just one book, beware that a couple of the books on that list represent views that are, shall we say, unusual. --clh]
15soc.religion.christian
Archive-name: space/controversy Last-modified: $Date: 93/04/01 14:39:06 $ CONTROVERSIAL QUESTIONS These issues periodically come up with much argument and few facts being offered. The summaries below attempt to represent the position on which much of the net community has settled. Please DON'T bring them up again unless there's something truly new to be discussed. The net can't set public policy, that's what your representatives are for. WHAT HAPPENED TO THE SATURN V PLANS Despite a widespread belief to the contrary, the Saturn V blueprints have not been lost. They are kept at Marshall Space Flight Center on microfilm. The problem in re-creating the Saturn V is not finding the drawings, it is finding vendors who can supply mid-1960's vintage hardware (like guidance system components), and the fact that the launch pads and VAB have been converted to Space Shuttle use, so you have no place to launch from. By the time you redesign to accommodate available hardware and re-modify the launch pads, you may as well have started from scratch with a clean sheet design. WHY DATA FROM SPACE MISSIONS ISN'T IMMEDIATELY AVAILABLE Investigators associated with NASA missions are allowed exclusive access for one year after the data is obtained in order to give them an opportunity to analyze the data and publish results without being "scooped" by people uninvolved in the mission. However, NASA frequently releases examples (in non-digital form, e.g. photos) to the public early in a mission. RISKS OF NUCLEAR (RTG) POWER SOURCES FOR SPACE PROBES There has been extensive discussion on this topic sparked by attempts to block the Galileo and Ulysses launches on grounds of the plutonium thermal sources being dangerous. Numerous studies claim that even in worst-case scenarios (shuttle explosion during launch, or accidental reentry at interplanetary velocities), the risks are extremely small. Two interesting data points are (1) The May 1968 loss of two SNAP 19B2 RTGs, which landed intact in the Pacific Ocean after a Nimbus B weather satellite failed to reach orbit. The fuel was recovered after 5 months with no release of plutonium. (2) In April 1970, the Apollo 13 lunar module reentered the atmosphere and its SNAP 27 RTG heat source, which was jettisoned, fell intact into the 20,000 feet deep Tonga Trench in the Pacific Ocean. The corrosion resistant materials of the RTG are expected to prevent release of the fuel for a period of time equal to 10 half-lives of the Pu-238 fuel or about 870 years [DOE 1980]. To make your own informed judgement, some references you may wish to pursue are: A good review of the technical facts and issues is given by Daniel Salisbury in "Radiation Risk and Planetary Exploration-- The RTG Controversy," *Planetary Report*, May-June 1987, pages 3-7. Another good article, which also reviews the events preceding Galileo's launch, "Showdown at Pad 39-B," by Robert G. Nichols, appeared in the November 1989 issue of *Ad Astra*. (Both magazines are published by pro-space organizations, the Planetary Society and the National Space Society respectively.) Gordon L Chipman, Jr., "Advanced Space Nuclear Systems" (AAS 82-261), in *Developing the Space Frontier*, edited by Albert Naumann and Grover Alexander, Univelt, 1983, p. 193-213. "Hazards from Plutonium Toxicity", by Bernard L. Cohen, Health Physics, Vol 32 (may) 1977, page 359-379. NUS Corporation, Safety Status Report for the Ulysses Mission: Risk Analysis (Book 1). Document number is NUS 5235; there is no GPO #; published Jan 31, 1990. NASA Office of Space Science and Applications, *Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Ulysses Mission (Tier 2)*, (no serial number or GPO number, but probably available from NTIS or NASA) June 1990. [DOE 1980] U.S. Department of Energy, *Transuranic Elements in the Environment*, Wayne C. Hanson, editor; DOE Document No. DOE/TIC-22800; Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., April 1980.) IMPACT OF THE SPACE SHUTTLE ON THE OZONE LAYER From time to time, claims are made that chemicals released from the Space Shuttle's Solid Rocket Boosters (SRBs) are responsible for a significant amount of damage to the ozone layer. Studies indicate that they in reality have only a minute impact, both in absolute terms and relative to other chemical sources. The remainder of this item is a response from the author of the quoted study, Charles Jackman. The atmospheric modelling study of the space shuttle effects on the stratosphere involved three independent theoretical groups, and was organized by Dr. Michael Prather, NASA/Goddard Institute for Space Studies. The three groups involved Michael Prather and Maria Garcia (NASA/GISS), Charlie Jackman and Anne Douglass (NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center), and Malcolm Ko and Dak Sze (Atmospheric and Environmental Research, Inc.). The effort was to look at the effects of the space shuttle and Titan rockets on the stratosphere. The following are the estimated sources of stratospheric chlorine: Industrial sources: 300,000,000 kilograms/year Natural sources: 75,000,000 kilograms/year Shuttle sources: 725,000 kilograms/year The shuttle source assumes 9 space shuttles and 6 Titan rockets are launched yearly. Thus the launches would add less than 0.25% to the total stratospheric chlorine sources. The effect on ozone is minimal: global yearly average total ozone would be decreased by 0.0065%. This is much less than total ozone variability associated with volcanic activity and solar flares. The influence of human-made chlorine products on ozone is computed by atmospheric model calculations to be a 1% decrease in globally averaged ozone between 1980 and 1990. The influence of the space shuttle and Titan rockets on the stratosphere is negligible. The launch schedule of the Space Shuttle and Titan rockets would need to be increased by over a factor of a hundred in order to have about the same effect on ozone as our increases in industrial halocarbons do at the present time. Theoretical results of this study have been published in _The Space Shuttle's Impact on the Stratosphere_, MJ Prather, MM Garcia, AR Douglass, CH Jackman, M.K.W. Ko and N.D. Sze, Journal of Geophysical Research, 95, 18583-18590, 1990. Charles Jackman, Atmospheric Chemistry and Dynamics Branch, Code 916, NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771 Also see _Chemical Rockets and the Environment_, A McDonald, R Bennett, J Hinshaw, and M Barnes, Aerospace America, May 1991. HOW LONG CAN A HUMAN LIVE UNPROTECTED IN SPACE If you *don't* try to hold your breath, exposure to space for half a minute or so is unlikely to produce permanent injury. Holding your breath is likely to damage your lungs, something scuba divers have to watch out for when ascending, and you'll have eardrum trouble if your Eustachian tubes are badly plugged up, but theory predicts -- and animal experiments confirm -- that otherwise, exposure to vacuum causes no immediate injury. You do not explode. Your blood does not boil. You do not freeze. You do not instantly lose consciousness. Various minor problems (sunburn, possibly "the bends", certainly some [mild, reversible, painless] swelling of skin and underlying tissue) start after ten seconds or so. At some point you lose consciousness from lack of oxygen. Injuries accumulate. After perhaps one or two minutes, you're dying. The limits are not really known. References: _The Effect on the Chimpanzee of Rapid Decompression to a Near Vacuum_, Alfred G. Koestler ed., NASA CR-329 (Nov 1965). _Experimental Animal Decompression to a Near Vacuum Environment_, R.W. Bancroft, J.E. Dunn, eds, Report SAM-TR-65-48 (June 1965), USAF School of Aerospace Medicine, Brooks AFB, Texas. HOW THE CHALLENGER ASTRONAUTS DIED The Challenger shuttle launch was not destroyed in an explosion. This is a well-documented fact; see the Rogers Commission report, for example. What looked like an explosion was fuel burning after the external tank came apart. The forces on the crew cabin were not sufficient to kill the astronauts, never mind destroy their bodies, according to the Kerwin team's medical/forensic report. The astronauts were killed when the more-or-less intact cabin hit the water at circa 200MPH, and their bodies then spent several weeks underwater. Their remains were recovered, and after the Kerwin team examined them, they were sent off to be buried. USING THE SHUTTLE BEYOND LOW EARTH ORBIT You can't use the shuttle orbiter for missions beyond low Earth orbit because it can't get there. It is big and heavy and does not carry enough fuel, even if you fill part of the cargo bay with tanks. Furthermore, it is not particularly sensible to do so, because much of that weight is things like wings, which are totally useless except in the immediate vicinity of the Earth. The shuttle orbiter is highly specialized for travel between Earth's surface and low orbit. Taking it higher is enormously costly and wasteful. A much better approach would be to use shuttle subsystems to build a specialized high-orbit spacecraft. [Yet another concise answer by Henry Spencer.] THE "FACE ON MARS" There really is a big rock on Mars that looks remarkably like a humanoid face. It appears in two different frames of Viking Orbiter imagery: 35A72 (much more facelike in appearance, and the one more often published, with the Sun 10 degrees above western horizon) and 70A13 (with the Sun 27 degrees from the west). Science writer Richard Hoagland has championed the idea that the Face is artificial, intended to resemble a human, and erected by an extraterrestrial civilization. Most other analysts concede that the resemblance is most likely accidental. Other Viking images show a smiley-faced crater and a lava flow resembling Kermit the Frog elsewhere on Mars. There exists a Mars Anomalies Research Society (sorry, don't know the address) to study the Face. The Mars Observer mission will carry an extremely high-resolution camera, and better images of the formation will hopefully settle this question in a few years. In the meantime, speculation about the Face is best carried on in the altnet group alt.alien.visitors, not sci.space or sci.astro. V. DiPeitro and G. Molenaar, *Unusual Martian Surface Features*, Mars Research, P.O. Box 284, Glen Dale, Maryland, USA, 1982. $18 by mail. R.R. Pozos, *The Face of Mars*, Chicago Review Press, 1986. [Account of an interdisciplinary speculative conference Hoagland organized to investigate the Face] R.C. Hoagland, *The Monuments of Mars: A City on the Edge of Forever*, North Atlantic Books, Berkeley, California, USA, 1987. [Elaborate discussion of evidence and speculation that formations near the Face form a city] M.J. Carlotto, "Digital Imagery Analysis of Unusual Martian Surface Features," *Applied Optics*, 27, pp. 1926-1933, 1987. [Extracts three-dimensional model for the Face from the 2-D images] M.J. Carlotto & M.C. Stein, "A Method of Searching for Artificial Objects on Planetary Surfaces," *Journal of the British Interplanetary Society*, Vol. 43 no. 5 (May 1990), p.209-216. [Uses a fractal image analysis model to guess whether the Face is artificial] B. O'Leary, "Analysis of Images of the `Face' on Mars and Possible Intelligent Origin," *JBIS*, Vol. 43 no. 5 (May 1990), p. 203-208. [Lights Carlotto's model from the two angles and shows it's consistent; shows that the Face doesn't look facelike if observed from the surface] NEXT: FAQ #13/15 - Space activist/interest/research groups & space publications
14sci.space
In article <1pscti$aqe@travis.csd.harris.com> srp@travis.csd.harris.com (Stephen Pietrowicz) writes: >... >How do you go about orienting all normals in the same direction, given a >set of points, edges and faces? Look for edge inconsistencies. Consider two vertices, p and q, which are connected by at least one edge. If (p,q) is an edge, then (q,p) should *not* appear. If *both* (p,q) and (q,p) appear as edges, then the surface "flips" when you travel across that edge. This is bad. Assuming (warning...warning...warning) that you have an otherwise acceptable surface - you can pick an edge, any edge, and traverse the surface enforcing consistency with that edge. 0) pick an edge (p,q), and mark it as "OK" 1) for each face, F, containing this edge (if more than 2, oops) make sure that all edges in F are consistent (i.e., the Face should be [(p,q),(q,r),(r,s),(s,t),(t,p)]). Flip those which are wrong. Mark all of the edges in F as "OK", and add them to a queue (check for duplicates, and especially inconsistencies - don't let the queue have both (p,q) and (q,p)). 2) remove an edge from the queue, and go to 1). If a *marked* edge is discovered to be inconsistent, then you lose. If step 1) finds more than one face sharing a particular edge, then you lose. Otherwise, when done, all of the edges will be consistent. Which means that all of the surface normals will either point IN or OUT. Deciding which way is OUT is left as an exercise... -- Kenneth Sloan Computer and Information Sciences sloan@cis.uab.edu University of Alabama at Birmingham (205) 934-2213 115A Campbell Hall, UAB Station (205) 934-5473 FAX Birmingham, AL 35294-1170
1comp.graphics
>I have never experienced wind so severe it physically precluded operation >of a motorcycle. It's more a matter of deciding whether the aggravation >is more trouble than it's worth. This of course, depends entirely on your >own particular circumstances and personal disposition. and skill. If you haven't done it before, it can be dangerous. It takes some getting used to. Read Ed's list. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Brad Thone Systems Consultant Systems Service Enterprises St. Louis, MO c09615bt @ wuvmd.wustl.edu c09615bt @ wuvmd.bitnet
8rec.motorcycles
In article <115437@bu.edu>, jaeger@buphy.bu.edu (Gregg Jaeger) wrote: > As I have stated on a parallel thread, I am not an anarchist, nor is > Islam anarchist. Therefore the UK should have control over itself. > However, this does not change the fact that it is possible for citizens > of the UK residing within the UK to be in violation of Islamic law. This is an interesting notion -- and one I'm scared of. In my case I'm a Finnish citizen, I live in USA, and I have to conform to the US laws. However, the Finnish government is not actively checking out what I'm doing in this country, in other words checking out if I conform to the Finnish laws. However, Islamic law seems to be a 'curse' that is following you everywhere in the world. Shades of 1984, eh? Cheers, Kent --- sandvik@newton.apple.com. ALink: KSAND -- Private activities on the net.
0alt.atheism
Posted for L. Neil Smith by Cathy Smith In article <C5uqqD.3GD@acsu.buffalo.edu> v111qheg@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (P.VASILION) writes: > >I'm putting together a list of the civil rights violations perpetrated against >the Davidians by the FBI/BATF. Here is what I've got so far. Care to add >any or provide more backup info? > >First Amendment: >Second Amendment: >Fourth Amendment: >Fifth Amendment: >Sixth Amendment: >Eighth Amendment: > >Anything I miss? > >--PV You might try the Ninth Amendment since Koresh and his people won't be exercising any of their _unenumerated_ rights from now on. You might also try the Tenth Amendment, since the jurisdiction of Texas law enforcement was clearly violated. Finally, check out the Fourteenth Amendment which merely underlines all of the previous violations, cubed and squared. L. Neil Smith (by Cathy Smith) My opinions are, of course, my own.
18talk.politics.misc
Hi Netters, I'm building a CAD package and need a 3D graphics library that can handle some rudimentry tasks, such as hidden line removal, shading, animation, etc. Can you please offer some recommendations? I'll also need contact info (name, address, email...) if you can find it. Thanks (Please Post Your Responses, in case others have same need) Bob Carpenter
1comp.graphics
In article <1993Apr19.130503.1@aurora.alaska.edu>, nsmca@aurora.alaska.edu writes: |> In article <6ZV82B2w165w@theporch.raider.net>, gene@theporch.raider.net (Gene Wright) writes: |> > With the continuin talk about the "End of the Space Age" and complaints |> > by government over the large cost, why not try something I read about |> > that might just work. |> > |> > Announce that a reward of $1 billion would go to the first corporation |> > who successfully keeps at least 1 person alive on the moon for a year. |> > Then you'd see some of the inexpensive but not popular technologies begin |> > to be developed. THere'd be a different kind of space race then! |> > |> > -- |> > gene@theporch.raider.net (Gene Wright) |> > theporch.raider.net 615/297-7951 The MacInteresteds of Nashville |> ==== |> If that were true, I'd go for it.. I have a few friends who we could pool our |> resources and do it.. Maybe make it a prize kind of liek the "Solar Car Race" |> in Australia.. |> Anybody game for a contest! |> |> == |> Michael Adams, nsmca@acad3.alaska.edu -- I'm not high, just jacked Oh gee, a billion dollars! That'd be just about enough to cover the cost of the feasability study! Happy, Happy, JOY! JOY! Peter F. Schaefer
14sci.space
In article <1993Apr15.214902.3372@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu> apanjabi@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu writes: ... >>HOW TO BEAT PITTSBURGH??? ... > III.Kevin Stevens > A.Fighting > 1.Call Bob Probert > 2.Call Tie Domi > 3.Call my grandmother (She'd kick his ass) > Yeah...I've seen you're grand mother...I bet she could. Joseph Stiehm
10rec.sport.hockey
In article <1993Apr16.181040.9381@qualcomm.com> karn@servo.qualcomm.com (Phil Karn) writes: >It looks like Dorothy Denning's wrong-headed ideas have gotten to the >Administration even sooner than we feared. I'd lay long odds that it was the other way around. Clinton didn't just pull this plan out of any bodily orifices; the NSA has to have been working on it for years. While it's possible that Denning (and other prominent people) just happened to start arguing for such a system, it seems more likely that there was a suggestion involved. If this guess is wrong, I apologize. PGP 2 key by finger or e-mail Eli ebrandt@jarthur.claremont.edu
11sci.crypt
Well, here are the results of the Mathematica test which I posted to this newsgroup. The "test" was the following command: >Plot3D[((-2*9000)/(2*3.1416*((x-5000)^2+(y-8000)^2+ >81000000)^1.5))+((-3*9000)/(2*3.1416*((x-10000)^2+ >(y-1000)^2+81000000)^1.5))+((4*2000)/(2*3.1416* >((x-7000)^2+(y-10000)^2+4000000)^1.5)), >{x,-5500,19500},{y,-5500,19500},PlotPoints->50] I was just curious how fast the plot command would be executed on various Macintosh machines as well as other personal computers and workstations. The results are posted below: Machine System Math vers. # of trials time, min PB 170 7.0.0 with 2.1 2 2:08 tuneup/8MB RAM/5MB for Mathematica DEC 5000 Ultrix v4.2a 2.1 for 1 0:25 DEC RISC IIsi 7.1/cache@96MB 1.2f33Enh. 1 4:30 25MHz/5MB RAM/ 3MB for Math./ w/ 68882 C650 7.1/8MB RAM 2 0:32 Q800 8MB/Cache@384/ 1.2 1:01 4MB for Math. Sparc SunOS4.1.3 0:14 Station 40MB RAM SGI Iris/4D R3000 RISC <0:01 processor version Sparc SunOS4.1.2 2.1 0:26 Station2 IIsi 7.1 3:15 NeXT NeXTSTEP 2.1 1.2 2:38 Cube 68030 based/ w/ coprocessor NeXT NeXTSTEP 3.0 1.2 5(ave) 0:52 Cube 68040/25MHz/ 20 MB RAM IIsi 17MB/8MB for 2.102 Enha 3:15 Math. w/ 68882 NeXT 16MB RAM/ 1 0:37 25 MHz 040/ Workspace Manager 2.1 Funny how the IIsi running at 25 MHz is slower than other equivalent machines, lots slower in fact. Perhaps the version of Mathematica makes a difference or the fact that not much RAM was allocated. Another interesting thing is how fast the SGI did it. Wow. Basically, though, I wouldn't draw any conclusions from this data. It seems that Mathematica's speed is dependant on a lot of variables. I was just curious how different machines would measure up. Well, if you have any questions or if I forgot something, just drop me a line at "cmmiller@iastate.edu". Chad PS If the spacing of the above table doesn't come out right on your machine, tell me and I'll mail you a copy of this in a binhexed Word 5.1 document.
4comp.sys.mac.hardware
SECRET PURPOSE OF FALKLANDS WAR; [with IN-VISIBILITY Technology] Dr. Beter AUDIO LETTER #74 of 80 Digitized by Jon Volkoff, mail address eidetics@cerf.net "AUDIO LETTER(R)" is a registered trademark of Audio Books, Inc., a Texas corporation, which originally produced this tape recording. Reproduced under open license granted by Audio Books, Inc. ----------------------------------------------------------------- This is the Dr. Beter AUDIO LETTER(R), 1629 K St. NW, Washington, DC 20006. Hello, my friends, this is Dr. Beter. Today is April 30, 1982, and this is my AUDIO LETTER(R) No. 74. It's now been almost one month since war broke out in the South Atlantic. On the surface it seems that it's only a dispute between Argentina and Great Britain over the barren, wind-swept Falkland Islands and South Georgia Island. In reality, it's far more than that. The so-called Falklands crisis is just the visible tip of a giant military operation. During this month of April 1982, fierce naval battles have taken place--not only in the South Atlantic but also in the South Pacific. Up to now most of the hostilities have been kept under wraps by wartime censorship on all sides. But as I say these words, the naval war in the Southern Hemisphere is about to come to the surface. Beginning today, April 30, a total naval and air blockade of the Falklands by the Royal Navy has begun. At the same time a counterblockade has been declared by Argentina in the same area. To be effective, a blockade must be imposed over a period of time, but the Royal Navy does not have that much time. Winter is coming on in the South Atlantic, and the British supply lines are overextended. Having come this far, Her Majesty's navy cannot simply drop the blockade and sail away in a few weeks time without drawing blood from Argentina. As a result the British will be forced to undertake military operations very soon no matter how risky they may be. There is also another reason why the Royal Navy now has no choice but to engage the Argentine forces in combat. That reason, my friends, is that the Royal Navy has already suffered losses in secret combat this month. Up to this moment there will be no way to explain away the damage which has been sustained by the British fleet. Only when publicly admitted fighting erupts will the British dare to admit that they have suffered battle losses. To obtain that cover story, the British have no choice but to sail into combat; but in doing so, they will be risking even heavier losses on top of those already sustained. In short, my friends, Her Majesty's navy has sailed into a trap. The events now unfolding in the South Atlantic carry strange, ironic echoes of the past. For weeks now we've been hearing countless commentators referring to the British task force as an "armada" (quote). The British of all people ought to be very uneasy with that description. The original Spanish Armada 400 years ago was renowned as a seemingly invincible fighting force, but it came to grief in a naval disaster so complete that it changed the course of history--and it was none other than the English navy that destroyed the Spanish Armada. The original Spanish Armada put to sea in 1588 during the reign of England's Queen Elizabeth I. The Armada was an invasion fleet carrying thousands of crack fighting men to invade England. They were met by the daring sea dogs of Sir Francis Drake. Drake and his small, fast ships turned the tables on the Spanish Armada by changing the rules of battle. The English fleet was equipped with new longer-range guns, and it stayed upwind and out of reach. From there the English pounded, smashed, and shattered the big ships of the mighty Armada. When it was all over, barely half the Spanish fleet was left to limp back to port. Drake's defeat of the Spanish Armada was a shock to the world. It opened the door for England under Queen Elizabeth I to start its expansion into a truly global empire. Today, 400 years later, history seems to have come full circle. Queen Elizabeth II is witnessing the dismantling of the world empire whose heyday began under Queen Elizabeth I, and now the cultures of England and of Spain are once again in confrontation. Once again a so-called armada is preparing for invasion, but this time the armada is British, not Spanish. Four hundred years ago Sir Francis Drake was the hero of the day; today, the ghost of Francis Drake is once again on the scene. The South Atlantic war zone is at the eastern end of the Drake Passage around the southern tip of South America. The defeat of the Spanish Armada four centuries ago broke the back of Spain's naval supremacy, and now the defeat of the new British armada may well break the back of what remains of the once glorious Royal Navy. My three special topics for this AUDIO LETTER are: Topic #1--THE MILITARY SECRET OF SOUTH GEORGIA ISLAND Topic #2--THE SECRET NAVAL WAR OF THE SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE Topic #3--THE ROCKEFELLER FEAR CAMPAIGN AGAINST NUCLEAR WAR. Topic #1--When the Falkland Islands crisis began early this month it looked at first like a tempest in a teapot. For a century and a half since 1833, the Islands have been controlled by Great Britain. During that entire time, British sovereignty over the Falklands has been disputed by Argentina. There have been countless threats by Argentina to seize the Islands, which it calls the Malvinas, but the threats have always come to nothing in the past and Britain has never even gotten very worried about them. The Islands are four times as distant from Argentina as Cuba is from the United States, and they are not much of a prize. After 150 years of occupancy, the Falklands are home to fewer than 2,000 British settlers and a lot of sheep. In short, the remote Falkland Islands hardly look like something to fight over, and yet here we are watching another crisis take place. We are watching as war erupts between Great Britain and Argentina. The Thatcher government is acting as if it has forgotten all about its usual preoccupation with the Soviet threat at NATO's doorstep. Instead, Britain is throwing almost everything it's got at Argentina---aircraft carriers, cruisers, destroyers, submarines, assault ships--you name it. Luxury cruise ships have even been commissioned and turned into troop carriers overnight. Wave after wave of additional assault troops have been activated and sent to join the fleet even after it sailed. Ships and submarines have been pulled off station from normal NATO duty and sent to reinforce the task force. The initial 40-ship force has grown steadily over the past several weeks into an armada numbering over 70. Over two-thirds of the entire Royal Navy has already been deployed to the South Atlantic off Argentina. Watching all this, a lot of people are asking: What's this fight really all about? The most popular answer suggested in the major media is "oil." Vast deposits of oil are known to exist under the continental shelf between Argentina and the Falklands, but that has been known for nearly 10 years. In no way does it explain the timing of the sudden military offensive by Argentina this month, and oil explains even less about the Argentine seizure of South Georgia Island. South Georgia Island is 800 miles east of the Falklands with no known oil deposits anywhere near it; and compared to South Georgia, the Falklands are an island paradise. South Georgia Island is covered with rugged mountains, treacherous valleys, glaciers, and semi-permanent snow. Most of it is uninhabitable. On top of all that, Argentina has absolutely no legal or historical claim to South Georgia Island. In that respect it stands in sharp contrast to the Falklands. In the early 1830s the Falklands were occupied for a while by Argentine colonists. In 1833 the British expelled them and took over the Island. For that and other historical reasons, Argentina argues that the Falklands really belong to Argentina, not Britain. But no such argument is possible for South Georgia Island. It has always been controlled by Britain, never by Argentina or Spain. The Argentine seizure of South Georgia Island looks even more unreasonable from a military point of view. Argentina's leaders are military men and they think in military terms. They were well aware ahead of time that far-off South Georgia Island could not possibly be held for long. By seizing it they were setting themselves up to absorb a military defeat, as the Island was retaken by Britain. So the question is: Why did Argentina's military junta bother with the seemingly worthless South Georgia Island at all? My friends, the answers to all these questions are military, not political or economic. South Georgia Island possesses an enormous military secret. It's a giant underground installation buried under the mountains at the northwest end of the Island. The real reason for the so-called Falkland crisis is this secret installation, together with two other similar installations which I will describe shortly. The secret military complexes have been in existence for many years; they are not new. What is new is the accelerated nuclear war timetable of the American Bolshevik war planners here in Washington. For the past two months I've been reporting the details of this new war plan to you as quickly as I can obtain and verify them. The plan calls for NUCLEAR WAR ONE to erupt by September of this year 1982!! It is this fast-approaching nuclear war threat that caused the so-called Falklands crisis to erupt now. What is going on now is a coordinated effort to spoil part of the Bolshevik grand strategy for the coming nuclear war. The mutual enemies of the American Bolsheviks here--namely, the Rockefeller cartel--and Russia's new rulers in the Kremlin are behind the present crisis. They are trying to ruin Phase #3 of the "PROJECT Z" war plan which I revealed last month. That phase is to be world domination by the American Bolsheviks after both Russia and the United States have been destroyed in NUCLEAR WAR ONE. As I mentioned last month, the key to this plan is the existence of secret weapons stockpiles in various places around the world. The American Bolshevik military planners here in America are working with other Bolshevik agents in key military positions of other countries to set off war. Having done that, they intend to ride out the nuclear holocaust they have caused, safe and cozy in Government war bunkers! When the warring nations finally lie smoldering and exhausted, the Bolsheviks will leave the shattered remains of their host countries. They will rendezvous at the secret weapons installations and bring their weapons into the open. They will confront the world with the only remaining fresh, up-to-date, powerful military force on earth; and using that military power, they will become the undisputed rulers of the world--that is, they plan to do all this, and they plan to pave the way for world domination very soon by setting off NUCLEAR WAR ONE in a matter of months. The Rockefeller cartel and Russia's new anti-Bolshevik rulers are working together in a race against time to try to head off the Bolshevik war plan. Last month I mentioned that the Bolsheviks here are benefitting from war preparations which were started by the Rockefellers long ago. It has only been about three years since the Rockefellers were dislodged as the prime movers of the United States Government by the Bolsheviks. Since that time the United States Government has been a house divided, torn by internal power struggles between rival Bolshevik and Rockefeller factions. But before that, the United States had been dominated for decades both economically and politically by the Four Rockefeller Brothers. In 1961 the Brothers launched a new long-range plan for world domination. It was a two-prong strategy, half visible and half secret, which I first described long ago in AUDIO LETTER No. 28. It was a plan for the United States to arm to the teeth in secret while appearing to disarm gradually. Without repeating all the details, the basic idea was grandiose yet simple. By deliberately appearing weak, the Rockefeller-controlled United States would maneuver itself into a nuclear war with Russia. Then the secret weapons, including superweapons, would be unleashed to smash Russia and take over the world. When they set the grand plan in motion in 1961, the Rockefeller Brothers were looking ahead to a nuclear war by the late 1970s. Their military analysts concluded very early that the war being planned would have very different effects on the Northern and Southern Hemispheres. Both superpowers, the United States and the Soviet Union, are located well up in the Northern Hemisphere; so are the other full-fledged nuclear powers--Great Britain, France, Red China, and India. By contrast, the strategic targets for nuclear war in the Southern Hemisphere are relatively few and far between. In other words, it was expected that the coming nuclear war would be essentially a Northern Hemisphere war. In an all-out nuclear holocaust it is known that serious radioactive fallout will gradually spread to affect even areas not initially hit by war. But there are limits to how far the war clouds can spread. It was discovered long ago that there is very little mixing between the air of the Northern and Southern Hemispheres. In the northern half of our planet, cold air from the North Pole works its way southward towards the equator, then it works its way back to the north as warm air. A mirror image of this process takes up the southern half of the planet. Northern and Southern Hemisphere air meet in the equatorial zone, but very little of the air changes places. The military conclusion, my friends, is this: the coming nuclear war could ruin large areas of the Northern Hemisphere for generations to come; but if the calculations are right, the Southern Hemisphere could escape virtually unaffected by the war. This was music to the ears of the Four Rockefeller Brothers. A quick look at the globe of the world shows why. The Rockefeller cartel has dominated Latin America ever since World War II. As I discussed in my very first monthly AUDIO LETTER, Nelson Rockefeller solidified the cartel grip on Latin America during the war. He accomplished this as so-called "Coordinator of Hemispheric Defense" for then-President Franklin D. Roosevelt. So that takes care of the South American continent and its natural resources. Then there is the African continent. There, too, Rockefeller control was already in effect over wide areas of Black Africa, especially south of the equator. All this was thanks to the efforts of John D. Rockefeller III, as I detailed in AUDIO LETTER No. 36. Looking around the globe, the most important remaining land masses from the standpoint of world domination are Australia and New Zealand. Thanks to World War II, both were wide open to the Rockefellers. The Rockefeller Brothers decided to establish secret military installations in the Southern Hemisphere for use after the coming war. By this means they expected to become the masters of the surviving southern half of planet Earth after the Northern Hemisphere war. Then, as the Northern Hemisphere gradually recovered from the nuclear holocaust, the Rockefeller empire would be able to pick up the pieces. In this way the third generation Rockefeller Brothers expected their family dynasty to inherit the Earth. In order to control the Southern Hemisphere militarily after the war, some means would have to be available to project military power onto any land mass. For example, revolts against Rockefeller domination would require troops--not a blast from the beam weapons on the Moon. The most critical factor for postwar military domination of the world was found to be a navy. A minimum of two secret naval fleets would be required--one based in the South Atlantic, the other in the South Pacific. Since the reserve naval fleets were to be kept secret until after the Northern Hemisphere nuclear war, they could not be built in existing shipyards. New construction facilities had to be built and they had to be hidden. To hide an entire shipyard is no small task; they take up a lot of space. On top of that, it was essential that the ships remain hidden after they were built. The best way to achieve that was to combine the shipyard and naval base into one over-all secret installation. Finally, the secret naval installation had to be invulnerable to nuclear attack; otherwise if its existence were ever discovered prematurely, the secret navy might be wiped out. The combined requirements for secrecy, space, and protection against attack were formidable; but one day in 1959, while all these plans were still in the early stages of development, the answer presented itself. During a so-called banking trip to Sweden, David Rockefeller was given a tour of a unique hidden naval port. The port is hollowed out from solid granite cliffs which come right down to the water. The entrance to the port is a gigantic hole in the side of the cliff which can be sealed off with enormous steel doors. Inside this big doorway on the water a huge cavity has been hollowed out to accommodate ships. The Rockefeller Brothers and their military adviser decided that a bigger, more secret, better protected version of the Swedish hidden port was just what they wanted. A survey of candidate sites was then initiated. The site survey covered coastal areas throughout the Southern Hemisphere. Many areas were rejected very quickly because the topography was wrong. Other areas were rejected because they were too close to the equator. Still others had to be ruled out because there were too many people living nearby, making the desired level of secrecy impossible. Finally, it was essential that the sites chosen for the secret naval installations be totally secure politically. At last the sites for the secret naval installations were selected. In the South Pacific, extreme southern New Zealand was selected. This is what I was alluding to in AUDIO LETTER No. 71 three months ago when I called attention to New Zealand's extreme importance in the coming war. In order to obtain the necessary space, the secret New Zealand naval installation had to be divided up into two sites located close together. One is at the extreme southwest tip of South Island where the mountain range known as the Southern Alps comes down virtually to the water's edge. The other part of the installation is built into the northwest tip of Stewart Island, which is off the tip of South Island. The Stewart Island facility is hollowed out within a rise known as Mt. Anglem. The New Zealand location met all the requirements. Ever since World War II the government of New Zealand has been tied even closer to the United States than to Great Britain. The location is far from the equator, and the installations are buried deep under mountains, protected from nuclear attack. They are also too deep to be reached by particle-beam attacks, and the New Zealand site is well situated to command the entire South Pacific. In the South Atlantic an even more perfect site was found. That site, my friends, is South Georgia Island. It is located perfectly for naval domination of the entire South Atlantic. The tall, rugged mountains provided a perfect location for the secret installation at the northwest tip of the 100-mile long island. It is controlled by Great Britain whose government, like that of New Zealand, was willing to cooperate; and South Georgia Island was virtually uninhabited except for a whaling station on the northeast coast. The whaling station was some 50 miles away from the secret new installation which was being built, but Britain took no chances. In 1965 the whaling station was closed down. Since that time there have been no inhabitants on South Georgia Island except for a few dozen alleged Antarctic scientists. Construction of the secret naval facilities--two in New Zealand, one on South Georgia Island--began in the early 1960's. The techniques were adapted from those used previously to build other large underground facilities, such as the NORAD installation inside Cheyenne Mountain, Colorado; however these techniques were adapted in radically new ways to achieve construction access directly from the sea instead of overland. In this way, the sheltering mountain was left undisturbed in appearance both during and after construction. The cuts in the mountain side which were necessary to let ships in and out were kept as small as possible and were well camouflaged. Like the Swedish hidden naval port arrangement, the entrances to the secret installations can be sealed up. When sealed, the entrance is virtually impossible to detect unless you know exactly where it is; and unlike most large construction projects, there are no tailings or piles of leftover rock lying around to attract attention. The man-made caverns which house the secret naval installations are enormous, but all the rock and debris was disposed of at sea. Once the secret naval facilities were built, they had to be outfitted for ship construction and docksite storage. The fake disarmament of the United States during the 1960s contributed greatly to this task. From 1961 to 1968 one man played a pivotal role in this elaborate Rockefeller scheme. He was then-Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara. All through the 60's McNamara presided over the public paring back of America's visible military power. This included the closing down and dismantling of entire shipyards. What we were not told was where all that shipyard equipment went afterwards. Where it went, my friends, was to the new secret installations which were being outfitted in New Zealand and South Georgia Island! The secret naval installations have been used as duplication facilities to reproduce certain ships and submarines designed and built here in the United States. As Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger told Congress recently, it is cheaper to build two ships at a time. That is especially true if the second ship is an exact duplicate of the first. This has become even more true in recent years through the use of computerized manufacturing techniques. The secret naval fleets which have been built at the secret installations are made up of duplicates--exact duplicates of certain other ships and submarines. They are all nuclear powered--nuclear "subs"; nuclear cruisers; nuclear destroyers; and yes, nuclear aircraft carriers, three of them. A secret twin was built for the U.S.S. Nimitz, for the U.S.S. Eisenhower, and for the newly-launched U.S.S. Carl Vincent. All have been financed through the gigantic cost overruns, so called, that we constantly hear about in the Defense Department; and all three carriers have been provided with a full complement of aircraft whose manufacture was financed the same way! The ships of the secret American Bolshevik naval fleets are all duplicates of other nuclear-powered vessels. Even so, the secret naval ships possess one key difference. Last month I revealed that the so-called "Stealth Program" has succeeded in developing a kind of electromagnetic invisibility shield. This technique makes an object invisible from a distance by distorting light waves in its vicinity. A whole new fleet of Phantom war-planes are now going into crash production that use this principle; and, my friends, all of the secret American Bolshevik navy ships have already been outfitted with similar Stealth-field equipment! The Stealth principle is actually easier to apply to ships than to airplanes because there is more room for the powerful equipment that generates the field. After NUCLEAR WAR ONE, the secret Stealth navy of the American Bolsheviks would be light years ahead of any other navy left on earth. It would be perfect for the intended role of world domination. The Rockefellers set it all in motion long ago, my friends, but three years ago they lost control of the United States Military. Now it's the American Bolsheviks who are in control, and they are bent on war. These secret naval installations have precipitated what is being called the "Falklands crisis." Topic #2--In AUDIO LETTER(R) No. 73 last month I described "PROJECT Z", the new Bolshevik three-phase strategy for NUCLEAR WAR ONE. An elite group of American Bolshevik military planners here are flushing out the plan right now at a secret war-room here in Washington. It's a plan by which the United States will strike the first nuclear blow, followed by all-out thermonuclear war with Russia. Having set off the holocaust, the Bolsheviks here and in certain other countries plan to rise it out safe in comfortable war bunkers. Finally after NUCLEAR WAR ONE fizzles out in stalemate, they plan to leave behind the ashes of the United States and her allies. Activating Phase #3 of their grand strategy, they plan to unveil their secret weapons, especially their secret naval fleets. With these they plan to conquer and rule what is left of the world. The United States as we know it will be dead and gone; but in the eyes of the Bolsheviks themselves, this outcome will constitute victory. Up to now the nuclear war timetable which I first revealed two months ago is still on track. They are still shooting for nuclear war to begin by September of this year 1982! Time is fast running out. The Bolsheviks here are sprinting as fast as they can toward war; but, my friends, the Bolsheviks are not the only runners in this race. They have two deadly enemies, both of whom are equally determined to trip up the Bolsheviks. One enemy of the Bolsheviks here is the Rockefeller cartel; the other enemy is the new anti-Bolshevik ruling clique in Russia; and now these two mutual enemies of the Bolsheviks are pooling their efforts in certain ways. In AUDIO LETTER No. 71 three months ago I reported that a limited, new anti-Bolshevik coalition was in the works between the Rockefeller cartel and the Russians. The January 26 meeting between Haig and Gromyko in Geneva, Switzerland, was a turning point in the formation of this coalition. It is now a reality, and is responsible for the so-called "Falkland crisis" now dominating the headlines. It should be emphasized that this new relationship between the Rockefeller cartel and Russia falls far short of a true alliance. They have very major disputes to be settled between them, but for the time being they have called a truce between themselves to deal with their mutual deadly enemy--the Bolsheviks here in America. The first priority of the Russians and the Rockefellers is to slow down the Bolshevik preparations for imminent nuclear war. If they can do that, time is on the side of the Rockefeller cartel in certain political movements which I discussed last summer in AUDIO LETTER No. 67. A slow-down in the nuclear war timetable will also give more breathing space for additional anti-Bolshevik actions to be implemented. The joint Rockefeller-Russian planners decided by mid-February that military action against the Bolsheviks was essential very quickly. No other type of action had any hope of taking effect fast enough to prevent nuclear war by the end of this summer. The exact details of the "PROJECT Z" war plan are not known to either the Rockefellers or the Russians, but the general outlines are known to be as I described last month. It was decided that military action should be devised that would undermine Phase #3 of the Bolshevik war plan--that is, the Bolshevik-controlled secret naval installations and fleets in the Southern Hemisphere should be attacked and crippled. By working together, the Rockefeller cartel and the Russians were able to devise an attack plan which neither could have carried out alone. The Rockefeller group, who built and originally controlled these bases, provided detailed Intelligence about the best way to attack them. The Russians with their enormous military machine provided the muscle to actually carry out the attack. It was essential to devise a scheme that would enable both secret fleets in the South Atlantic and South Pacific to be attacked. Survival intact of either fleet would leave the Bolshevik war plan still workable. Military analysts concluded very quickly that a direct assault on the New Zealand facilities was out of the question. There was no combination of commandos, frogmen, or other military force which could possibly keep an attack secret from the outside world. Any attack on the New Zealand bases would set off the very war which the Rockefellers and Russians want to prevent. But the situation in the South Atlantic was a different matter. In a way, the greatest asset of South Georgia Island was also its Achilles' heel. The extreme isolation which protected the secrecy of the South Georgia base also made a covert military assault feasible. The key lay with Argentina and her long-standing claims to the Falkland Islands. As I mentioned in Topic #1, the Rockefeller cartel has dominated all of Latin America for decades. Cartel operatives were sent to Argentina to work out a deal with the government military junta there. The historic dispute over the Falkland Islands was to be used to provide a ruse, a military cover, to enable the South Georgia base to be attacked. The Argentine generals were not told everything about the situation by any means, but they were told enough to make clear what they were to do. As an inducement to cooperate, the Argentine leaders were promised handsome rewards. They were guaranteed that after the shooting was over, the Falkland Islands would remain in Argentine hands. This guarantee included the promise of covert military assistance as needed against the Royal Navy. And to bolster the troubled Argentine economy, it was promised that the Rockefeller cartel will help develop the immense offshore oil reserves. With these combined promises of military glory and financial rewards, the Argentine military junta agreed to the plan. On March 19 Argentina carried out Act #1 in the joint attack plan. A group of Argentine scrap-metal merchants, of all things, landed at the abandoned old whaling station on South Georgia Island. Supposedly they were there to dismantle the old buildings and cart them off to sell. While they were at it they also raised the Argentine flag over the work-site. The British, always nervous about South Georgia Island, promptly reacted as expected. The British Antarctic survey ship "Endurance" put 22 Marines ashore. They drove off the scrap merchants and tore down the Argentine flag. The incident provided the desired excuse for the Argentine Junta to bring the simmering 150-year-old Falklands dispute to a boil. From time to time in the past, Argentina has claimed that South Georgia is part of the Falklands because it is administered that way by Britain. That argument is very flimsy but it now came in very handy. It was nothing new to hear this from Argentine leaders, so there was no hint of what was really afoot. During late March, Argentine military forces started assembling for an assault on the Falklands. "Nothing new", thought the British high command. Argentina has carried out threatening maneuvers in the past many times. It was believed that they were about to do it again; but on April 2 Argentine forces did the unexpected. After many past false alarms, this time they actually invaded and seized the Islands. All Argentine public statements emphasized the long-standing historical claims to the Falklands themselves; but just for good measure, the next day a small Argentine force also seized far-off South Georgia Island. The force was so small that it gave the appearance initially that it was just a side show from Argentina's point of view; however, the small contingent of 22 Royal Marines were overpowered and bundled off the Island along with a group of 13 alleged scientists. That was the moment of payoff in the joint Rockefeller-Russian attack plan. Thanks to the elaborate distraction staged by the Argentine forces, a special commando team got onto the Island undetected. Based on the detailed Rockefeller information about the base, the team moved to a location on the mountain directly above the cavernous secret base. Special high-speed drilling equipment was set up by the Rockefeller members of the team while the Russian members concentrated on military defense. By late that evening, April 3, the military high command in London finally learned what was really taking place. The secret South Georgia base was under attack by virtually the only means possible. The joint Rockefeller-Russian team were drilling a shaft down through the mountain toward the hollowed out cavern inside. It was only a matter of time until their drill would break through the ceiling of the giant hidden naval base. Once the hole was made, the next step was obvious. The Rockefeller-Russian team would put a weapon of some kind through the hole. The best guess was that it would be a nerve gas. The shock waves that went through the highest levels of the British government on the evening of April 3 can hardly be described, my friends. The Thatcher government, like the so-called Reagan Administration here in America, is Bolshevik controlled. That's why Margaret Thatcher always says, "Me, too" any time the Reagan Administration says or does anything against Russia. Both governments are party to the secret nuclear war plan in complete betrayal of the people of their respective countries, and on the evening of April 3 they suddenly discovered that their precious war plan was in deep, deep trouble. Immediately the Thatcher government started assembling a naval armada to sail for the South Atlantic. Haste was the order of the day. The drilling on South Georgia Island was proceeding around the clock. The best estimates were that the drilling would break through into the roof of the naval base in about three weeks, on or about April 24. If help did not reach South Georgia by then, the secret installation might be doomed. The forces stationed at the installation itself were unable to defend themselves under the circumstances. Their mighty naval ships were ships in a bottle. They did not dare open the bottle to sail out to fight because the Russian commandos were armed with tactical and nuclear weapons. To open the blast-proof entrance doors would be suicide. On April 5, just two days after South Georgia Island was seized, some 40 naval ships began moving out of British ports. The same day Lord Carrington was sacked as Foreign Minister. He was forced to resign, my friends, because he had assisted the Rockefeller attack plan by downplaying the Argentine attack preparations. That same day, April 5, New Zealand, the home of the other secret naval fleet, broke diplomatic relations with Argentina. The two hidden New Zealand facilities had been placed on "Red Alert." As a precautionary measure, all submarines at the twin base were ordered to sea. Several surface ships were already at sea undergoing "sea trials", but that still left seven (7) major ships inside the hidden twin naval base including one of the nuclear aircraft carriers I mentioned earlier. On that busy day of April 5, Argentina's Foreign Minister, Costa Mendez, was at the United Nations in New York. He was alarmed by the deployment of such a large part of the Royal Navy. Costa Mendez hurried here to Washington to seek reassurances from certain officials. He got them! For the next two weeks or so the news was filled with stories about the allegedly slow movement of the British fleet while negotiations went on. That, my friends, was only a cover story. The Royal Navy was actually joining up and moving as rapidly as possible toward South Georgia Island. If the task force arrived in time to save the secret base, a major battle was likely. The official stories about "slow movement" of the British armada were intended to give a cushion of time for that battle. If need be, the fleet would have several days to retake South Georgia Island, then it could move on to arrive near the Falklands on the announced schedule. In this way the crucial importance of South Georgia Island would be hidden and the big secret preserved. It was initially expected that advance elements of the British fleet would reach the vicinity of South Georgia Island within two weeks. That would have been soon enough to attack the joint Rockefeller-Russian commando team and stop the drilling before it was completed. But Russian Cosmospheres and submarines made a shambles of the plan. Key advance elements of the South Georgia attack contingent left Ascension Island early April 14, two days before it was announced officially. Shortly after they did so, they ran into trouble. Russian Cosmospheres and attack submarines closed in on a single ship which was critical to the planned counterassault on South Georgia Island. The Cosmospheres bombarded the bridge and combat information center of the ship with neutron radiation. In moments the ship was without any command, its communications and radar silenced. Then a Russian "sub" closed in and quickly finished off this key British ship with torpedoes. It broke apart with secondary explosions and sank rapidly. So far as is known, there were no survivors. This unexpected shock in the mid-Atlantic produced two results, both important: First, it caused a slowdown in the race toward the South Atlantic by the British armada. The task force had to be regrouped into a configuration better suited for an enroute defense, but that cost valuable time. Public announcements from London about the progress of the fleet reflected this slowdown. The timetable for arrival on battle stations near the Falklands started stretching out longer and longer. All this bought extra time for the joint commando team on South Georgia Island. The drilling continued. The other result of the sinking was equally important. Word was flashed to the South Pacific Stealth navy to prepare for possible action. It was obvious that the Russian Navy was getting involved in the Atlantic, which meant that the Royal Navy could be in big trouble. During the dead of night, early April 15, the seven Stealth ships put to sea from their twin secret bases in southern New Zealand. They deployed to a secret operational headquarters area in the Antipodes Islands, 450 miles southeast of New Zealand. Their electromagnetic shields were operating to provide protection from attack. These shields make it impossible to communicate with the outside world or even to see it, as I explained last month; but once they arrived at the Antipodes, the Stealth ships hooked up to buoys equipped with shielded communication cables to the Island headquarters. The Antipodes headquarters, in turn, was in constant touch with the South Georgia base by way of a transoceanic cable around the tip of South America. The deployment of the available ships of the South Pacific Stealth fleet was exactly what the joint Rockefeller-Russian planners had hoped for. The ships had been flushed out from their essentially invulnerable hiding place in New Zealand! The British ship's sinking of April 14 was also followed by other events. On April 15 the Argentine Navy started moving out of port. The same day, Alexander Haig arrived again in Buenos Aires. Supposedly he was there as a diplomat, but in reality he was there as a General, dealing with Generals. Haig is the top Governmental operative of the Rockefeller cartel, as I have revealed in the past. He was making sure that the Argentines did not get cold feet and back down at that critical moment. Four days later, April 19, Haig left for Washington. As he boarded his plane, Haig somberly told reporters, "Time is running out." And so it was, my friends, for the secret South Georgia base. The very next day, April 20, the drill broke through into the hollowed-out cavern of the naval base. Bolshevik military analysts in London had not expected that it could be completed until at least the following weekend. The British fleet was still out of range. The weapon which the commando team inserted down through the long hole was a small, compact Russian neutron bomb. When it was detonated inside the confines of the huge artificial cave, the effects were devastating. The intense radiation instantly killed everyone inside the base. Also the heat and blast effects of the bomb are believed to have damaged all the ships inside sufficiently to badly disable them. Meanwhile, Russian Cosmospheres and submarines were converging on the Stealth ships which were near the Antipodes Islands awaiting orders. From a distance, the ships were invisible to the eye due to their protective shields, which also protect against beam-weapon attack; but they were sitting ducks for the tactics which the Russians employed. Floating overhead, the Cosmospheres located the seven ships using their Psychoenergetic Range-Finding equipment known as PRF. As I have reported in the past, there is no method known by which PRF can be jammed. The Cosmospheres radioed the exact locations of the ships to the attack submarines. The "subs" were armed with special non-homing, non-nuclear torpedoes designed to explode on impact. More sophisticated torpedoes would have been thrown off course or detonated prematurely by the protective shield of each ship; but these simple torpedoes just cruise right through each invisibility field to strike the ship and explode. Within 15 minutes after the attack began, all seven Bolshevik Stealth ships were on their way to the bottom, and with them went their Bolshevik Commanders and mercenary crews collected from around the world. The South Pacific action took place just after sunset local time. The time here in Washington was around 2:00 P.M. April 23. That evening Secretary of State Haig was seen briefly in public with the new British Foreign Minister, Francis Pym. Pym was wearing the artificial pseudo-smile which diplomats are taught always to display in public. But not Haig. Haig was grinning from ear to ear, and no wonder. The joint Rockefeller-Russian military operation had been a brilliant success. The secret Bolshevik South Atlantic fleet had been virtually wiped out, bottled up inside South Georgia Island; and the South Pacific fleet, while not totally wiped out, had been badly crippled. By working together, the Rockefeller cartel and the Russians had won the secret naval war of the Southern Hemisphere. Topic #3--As I say these words, news reports give the impression that war is about to erupt in the South Atlantic, but the real war in the Southern Hemisphere is already over. What we are watching now is the beginning of its bloody aftermath. That aftermath is the battle for the Falkland Islands. They have been promised to Argentina as a reward for her role in the secret war. At this moment the Bolsheviks here in Washington are pressing for a public announcement that the United States will side with Britain. As soon as that takes place, military action will heat up fast around the Falklands. Britain has no choice but to fight. She has already suffered casualties which cannot be explained without a public battle; but by fighting, the Bolsheviks in Britain are running the risk of a humiliating and tragic defeat for the Royal Navy. Meanwhile, the Rockefeller strategists here are now concentrating on a fast-building, anti-nuclear-war campaign. On all sides now we are hearing about the so-called "nuclear freeze movement." There are documentaries, articles, publicity of all kinds to sensitize us to the terrors of nuclear war. In recent months, there have even been referenda popping up on election ballots dealing with the nuclear war issue. Medical doctors are banding together to warn the public about what would happen if there were a nuclear war. We are being told that all this is just popping up spontaneously. We are now 37 years into the nuclear age and nothing like this has ever gained so much momentum before, yet now we are supposed to believe that millions of Americans have spontaneously gotten the same ideas at the same time. If you believe that, my friends, I give up. Movements like this never, and I mean never, develop without leadership, organization, and money--and plenty of it. What we are watching is the Rockefeller public relations machine at work. As I've explained in the past, the Rockefeller cartel cannot afford to let a nuclear war take place. If it does, they will lose everything because they are not in a position to control it. Instead, the deadly enemies of the Rockefeller cartel, the Bolsheviks here, will win out if there is a war; and so the Rockefeller faction is now doing everything in its power to prevent a nuclear war. The present anti-nuclear-war orientation of the Rockefeller cartel creates certain temporary common interests between them and Russia; but as Russia's new rulers know very well, this does not spring from any great moral perspective on the part of the Rockefeller group. It's purely a matter of practical necessity right now for the Rockefellers. The Russians regard the United States as a house divided, and they are exploiting that division by working in careful ways with the Rockefellers. Their first priority is to rid the world of the deadly Bolshevik menace of all-out, even suicidal, nuclear war; but once that is done, they know that there will be a day of reckoning with the Rockefeller cartel some day. The Rockefeller group is working toward a definite objective with their new anti-nuclear-war propaganda. That objective is renewed power--and power that moves them closer to their old dream of WORLD GOVERNMENT. The Bolsheviks here have unwittingly provided fertile ground for the powerful new Rockefeller antiwar campaign. Under Bolshevik control, the so-called Reagan Administration has become so hawkish that it's scaring people. The Rockefeller antiwar campaign is designed to capitalize on that latent fear as a tool of power. These days the smell of war is in the air. The Falklands crisis is helping to make that more intense. The Rockefeller propaganda machine is now paving the way for the argument that surrender of sovereignty is the only way to avoid war. A new super-United Nations of sorts is now in the works to fill the bill. It will have teeth! As presently envisioned, the new organization will be based in Geneva, Switzerland. The working name, though this may be changed, is the "World Nonproliferation Council." The plan is to bring it into being as the outgrowth of nuclear nonproliferation treaties, but its true purpose will be to use fear--the fear of war--to control us all. LAST MINUTE SUMMARY Now it's time for my Last Minute Summary. In this AUDIO LETTER I have reported on the reasons behind the so-called Falkland Islands crisis. The crisis erupted because of secret Bolshevik-controlled naval installations in the Southern Hemisphere. These have been attacked by joint action of the Rockefeller cartel and the Russians in an attempt to slow down the nuclear-war timetable. The attacks were successful, but the results remain to be seen. One result, though, is that the Royal Navy has now been drawn into a trap. Britain's Waterloo at sea may well be at hand. My friends, two factions are struggling for control over our United States--the Rockefeller cartel and the Bolsheviks. They differ in style but both seek to control us through fear. If we are ever to rise above their trickery, it must be through the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, our only hope. As the Scripture tells us, our Lord "...has not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, of love, and of a sound mind." We must learn to wage peace. As our Lord declared long ago, "Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called sons of God." Until next month, God willing, this is Dr. Beter. Thank you, and may God bless each and every one of you.
18talk.politics.misc
ITEM: Sony ES-CDPX229* CONDITION: excellent AGE: 1 year old PRICE: $300 *includes TOS.LINK ITEM: Sony CDP 770 CONDITION: excellent AGE: 2.5 years old PRICE: $250 Everything comes with the original packaging and manuals. These items have only been played through audiophile system and are in excellent shape. If you are interested, or need any additional information, please e-mail (pc1o@andrew.cmu.edu) or call me at home. Thanks, Jon (412) 882-6425 P.S. Yes, these are for sale again.
6misc.forsale
In article <1r2ls3$8mo@fido.asd.sgi.com> livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes: #In article <1qu03p$442@horus.ap.mchp.sni.de>, frank@D012S658.uucp (Frank O'Dwyer) writes: #|> In article <1qsili$fme@fido.asd.sgi.com> livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes: #|> # #|> #You're admitting a lot more than that. You are admitting that #|> #your morals are situational. You are admitting that the actions #|> #of other people and the situation you are in help to determine #|> #how you judge the moral significance of one of your own actions. #|> #|> Sure. #|> #|> #If you employ X degree of force, that's not moral, but if you employ #|> #X degree of force, but previously someone else has employed Y degree #|> #of force, and the situation is thus-and-so, that *is* moral. #|> #|> Sure, within the limits of what I know. #|> #|> #This is quite different from saying "Employing force on other people #|> #is immoral, period. Unfortunately, from time to time we are obliged #|> #to do this immoral thing for reasons of self-preservation, and so #|> #we have to bear the moral consequences of that. #|> #|> Since both statements, to all intents and purposes, say effectively #|> the same thing, # #Are you serious? Two statements, one of which says that use of force #in the given situation is moral, and the other of which says it is #not moral "say effectively the same thing?" Yes, when you tag on the "Unfortunately, ...", then to all intents and purposes you are saying the same thing. #Would you say this of any two statements, one saying "X is moral" and #the other saying "X is immoral?" How would you decided when two #statements "X is moral" "X is immoral" actually conflict, and when #they "say effectively the same thing". What they prescribe that one should do is a pretty good indicator. #|> and lead one to do precisely the same thing, then #|> either both statements are doublespeak, or none. # #They might lead you to do the same thing, but the difference is what #motivates pacifism so they obviously don't lead pacifists to to the #same thing. That's not true. You could formulate a pragmatic belief in minimum force and still be a pacifist. If the minimum is 0, great - but one is always trying to get as close to 0 force as possible under that belief. Not the same as 'force is immoral, period', but still tending to pacifism. -- Frank O'Dwyer 'I'm not hatching That' odwyer@sse.ie from "Hens", by Evelyn Conlon
0alt.atheism
In article <1993Apr19.203616.21280@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>, ece_0028@bigdog.engr.arizona.edu (David Anderson) wrote: > > In article <930419.103239.5M4.rusnews.w165w@mantis.co.uk> mathew@mantis.co.uk (mathew) writes: > > > >Prove that you exist, Frank. > >mathew > > Cogito, ergo sum. :) OK. Prove you _think_. -- Lefty (lefty@apple.com) C:.M:.C:., D:.O:.D:.
0alt.atheism
In article <westesC5qvAp.BGJ@netcom.com> westes@netcom.com (Will Estes) writes: >I have just installed a Diamond Stealth 24 ISA card in >a '486DX2-66 system with 256K cache, and 16 megs of memory, >that gets about a 126 SI 6.0 CPU Benchmark rating. Using >the 1024x768x16 color driver under Windows, I am getting a >Winbench Winmarks rating of only about 9.5 Million. Since >I have heard that others get 15-to-16 million for this card, >I assume that something is very wrong with my setup. >What are some possible causes of the card slowing down like this? Most importantly, which Winbench version are you using? On my local bus ATI Graphics Ultra Pro, I've gotten various Winbench scores from 15.8 million to 31 million winmarks, depending on the version. Winbench 2.5 gives the most optimistic scores, 3.11 gives the least. A winmark rating is meaningless without a corresponding version number. Dan -- Daniel Matthew Coleman | Internet: dcoleman@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu -----------------------------------+---------- : dcoleman@utxvms.cc.utexas.edu The University of Texas at Austin | DECnet: UTXVMS::DCOLEMAN Electrical/Computer Engineering | BITNET: DCOLEMAN@UTXVMS [.BITNET] -----------------------------------+------------------------------------------
3comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
The following cassette tapes are for sale. $3.00 each... $2.50 each for multiple orders, shipping included. Trades can be arranged. Some of the cases are somewhat worn, with a few cracks, but the tapes are all in good condition and sound fine. E-mail to the posting account. Thanks. The Who -Who's Greatest Hits Bachman Turner Overdrive -Best of BTO (so far) Van Halen -5150 -OU812 The Doors -The Best of the Doors The Cars -Door to Door -The Cars Greatest Hits Phil Collins -Face Value -No Jacket Required Tears for Fears -Songs From the Big Chair thanks, dave ________________________________________________________________ David Hillman "nothing measurable matters the University of Chicago a very good god damn..." dahillma@midway.uchicago.edu e.e. cummings ________________________________________________________________
6misc.forsale
The following is posted for a friend. Send replies to the address at the end of the post please. Attention Zenith Z-248 owners!!! upgrade your 8 MHz AT-class machine to '386 performance with a genuine Zenith motherboard for a clone price! Motherboard and I/O card pop right in to your Z-248 case while keeping your existing video and disk controllers. Zenith Z-386/25 motherboard featuring 16kb of 16-layer, posted-write cache using 15 ns SRAM; 8 Mb of 70 ns DRAM included, accepts 20 Mb on motherboard (further RAM upgrades available via SuperSlots running at memory bus speeds; 7 Expansion slots feature 4 Zenith 32-bit SuperSlots: autodetects 8/16/32-bit adapters; latest rev. of Z-300 setup/monitor ROMs, two serial ports, one parallel port, secondary fan for improved system cooling, Z-386 User's Guide, Z-386 Maintenance Guide and diagnostics disk included. $575 (includes S/H/insurance). Replies to: stann@aol.com Replies to me will be forwarded. Thanks..... brian -- Brian Shapiro, Systems Support Specialist Ohio University, Athens, Ohio 45701 (614) 593-1608 shapiro@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu or SHAPIROB@OUACCVMA.BITNET
6misc.forsale
horton@what.sps.mot.com (David Horton) writes: >bm967@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (David Kantrowitz) writes: >> >>> When the computer is set for 256 colors and certain operations are done, >>> particularly vertical scrolling through a window, horizontal white lines >>> appear on the monitor (which generally but not always spare open >>> windows). These lines accummulate as the operation is continued. If a >>> window is moved over the involved area of the screen and then moved away >>> the line disappear from that area of the screen. This problem is not >>> observed if the monitor is configured for 16 colors or a 14 inch Apple >>> monitor with 256 colors is used. >>> >>Has anyone NOT had these problems in the given configurations? >>(that would help eliminate design flaw as the explanation) >As a data point, I'm using a Centris 610 4/80 with the Apple 16" >monitor and do NOT have these problems. I can produce similar artifacts. I am using a Centris 610 with an Apple 16" monitor. I got the 8/230/CD configuration, so there is on-board ethernet and 1 Megabyte of video ram. The effect only occurs in 256 color and 256 grey modes. Any vertical scrolling operation, whether with a scrollbar or, say, using vi and inserting lines, will produce a scattering of horizontal flickering lines on the screen. They do not persist -- each is visible for perhaps one refresh, and then that part of the screen is back as usual. They seem to always start at or about the 64th pixel from the left, and are maybe 512 pixels wide. This is certainly not preventing me from using my Macintosh ;-), but it does seem to be a sign of something perhaps grounded incorrectly in the video circuitry... I went ahead and called the Apple Customer Assistance Center, at: 1-800-776-2333, or 1-800-767-2775 (more direct?) The person who answered was polite :-). I also took the chance to complain about my mouse button sticking, and about the mac hanging on boot after a (hard - killed MacsBug) crash which left a CD in the drive. (I had to play with a paperclip for about 5 minutes to get thing to eject, after which the mac booted fine.) -- Garth Dickie : dickie@math.wisc.edu
4comp.sys.mac.hardware
In article <C5uLqG.I5@acsu.buffalo.edu> v064mb9k@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (NEIL B. GANDLER) writes: > > How does the radio Electronics free information cards work. >Do they just send you some general information about the companies that >advertise in their magazine or does it also give you sign you up for a >catalog. That depends entirely upon the advertiser whose number you circled. Radio Electronics compiles all of the cards, then each advertiser gets a computer printout of the names and addresses of all of the readers who circled their number. Some magazines also provide the data on self-adhesive labels, and the really big magazines provide the data on computer disk. The advertiser decides what to do with the data they get. You will notice that the Radio Electronics information card (commonly called a "bingo card" in the industry) includes lines for a company name and a business phone number. My guess would be that the big, national advertisers make a distinction between hobbiests and professionals as best they can. For example, if you include Motorola as your company and include a business phone (and a mail stop), Tektronics will probably send you a copy of their hard-bound catalog and have a sales engineer call you about a week later. If you leave it blank, odds are they will send you a slick brochure and direct you to a local retail outlet. Medium and small companies are more likely to send you th e whole catalog. And then some companies, like Digikey or Jameco, have nothing to mail out accept the catalog. A couple of other interesting points about bingo cards: Free, industry magazines like EDN and such also log your card to their computer. They use the information at least three ways. They note that you really do read the magazine and are more likely to continue your subscription or push you, through repeated mailings, to re-subscribe. They also compile how many people requested which data for their marketing demographics. This way thay can tell a prospective advertiser that "23% of readers requesting data were interested in capacitors." And finally, some magazines rent lists of readers who request certain information. For example, Tektronics can rent a list of everyone who requested information about test equipment OTHER THAN TEKTRONIC's, in the past 6 months. The other point, in the data the advertiser receives, many magazines include how many items you circled on the card. If they want, the advertiser can attempt to cull out the "literature collectors" from the serious potential customers. "Can you say qualified sales leads? I thought you could." What's the BEST way for a hobbiest to deal with bingo cards? Never circle more than 8 number on the card. If you want more than 8 items, use the second card and mail it a couple of weeks later. If you are really, really serious and you really, really want the information, CALL THE ADVERTISER AND ASK! This will also cut about 15 days off the the response time. Virtually everyone takes a voice on the phone more seriously than data on a computer printout. To help insure you keep getting a trade magazine that you're not really "qualified" for, send in a bingo card at least every other month and circle two or three numbers. Include a business name and phone number, even if it's your house. Advertisers almost never call. John Schuch publisher of: The Arizona High-Tech Times The Arizona Electrical Journal The Arizona HVAC News (all of which have bingo cards)
12sci.electronics
In article <C5Hu6q.CG3@news.cso.uiuc.edu> eshneken@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (Edward A Shnekendorf) writes: >cl056@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Hamaza H. Salah) writes: > > >>In a previous article, friedenb@sapphire.egr.msu.edu (Gedaliah Friedenberg) says: > >>> >>>For all those interested, I would like to inform all that Binyamin Netanyahu >>>(leader of the Israeli Likud party) will be interviewed on CNN tonight on >>>Larry King Live. > > >>didn't this guy go crying on the "zionist" tv confessing >>that he committed adultary, and was cheating on his wife.. > >>a typical jew leader, huh? > >Yes. He is. Actually, the typical Muslim/Arab leader hides the fact that he >commited adultery by choosing a camel over his husband (or a small male child, >whichever is more readily availible). > Arab leaders don't have to cheat, they are actually allowed to have four wives. Are you implying above that Arab leaders are gays? Aren't there Jewish gays too? Nabil >
18talk.politics.misc
My Western Digital also has three sets of pins on the back. I am using it with another hard drive as well and the settings for the jumpers were written right on the circuit board of the WD drive......MA SL ?? I can't remember what the last one was. If you can't find these markings on the circuit board, I'll open my machine and tell you what mine are....... Kevin Holly McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario hollyk@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca
3comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
In article <arturo.735339956@infmx> arturo@informix.com (Arturo Vega) writes: > >Has anyone else ever caught themselves waving at oncoming motorcycle riders >while in a car? > ha! if i'm not on my bike, it's because its _broken_ and i'm _walkin_. ( really the way it should be) -- kyle cassidy cassidy@rowan.edu "fire all of your guns at once!" DoD #760
8rec.motorcycles
The Blues scored two power-play goals in 17 seconds in the third period and the beat the Chicago Blackhawks 4-3 Sunday afternoon at Chicago Stadium. Brendan Shanahan tied the game 3-3 and Brett Hull scored the game winner 17 seconds later. Jeff Brown and Denny Felsner scored the other Blues goals. Brian Noonan had the hat trick for the Hawks, who also had some very good goaltending from Ed Belfour. Blues goalie Curtis Joseph was solid down the stretch to preserve the Blues lead. The Hawks came out strong in the first period, outshooting the Blues 6-1 and taking a 1-0 lead on Noonan's first goal. Right after an interference penalty on Rick Zombo had expired, Keith Brown intercepted a clearing attempt at the blue line and passed the puck to Steve Larmer in the right circle. Larmer fired a long slap shot, and Noonan deflected the puck between Joseph's pads. After the goal, the Blues picked up the intensity and went on to outshoot the Hawks 10-9 in the first period. Jeff Brown tied the game 1-1 at 3:12 of the second. Nelson Emerson broke in on the left side, got by Craig Muni and pushed the puck across the slot. Belfour came out to play the pass and shoveled it to the right boards, where Brown collected it and slapped it in before Belfour could get back to the goal. Two minutes later on a Hawks power play, Belfour stopped Rich Sutter on a short-handed break-in. Chris Chelios picked up the puck and passed it to Jeremy Roenick who carried it on right wing and found an open Noonan with a nice pass across the slot. Noonan fired it past Joseph at 5:30 for the 2-1 lead. Noonan completed his hat trick 3:11 later to increase the Hawks' lead to 3-1. Stephane Matteau made a nice pass from the right boards to Noonan who beat Stephane Quintal by driving to the net. Joseph had no chance as Noonan deflected the puck in the net. Denny Felsner reduced the Blues deficit to 3-1 at 12:49 after picking up the rebound of Basil McRae's slap shot from the slot. Janney set up McRae for the shot, and the puck sailed wide of the net and bounced off the end boards to Felsner. Felsner sticked the rebound into the partially open net. The Blues outshot the Hawks 10-5 in the second period. With the Blackhawks leading 3-2 at 9:56 of the third, Stephane Matteau picked up a high sticking penalty. Just 53 seconds into the power play, Steve Smith was called for slashing, giving the Blues a 5-on-3 advantage for 1:07. The Blues didn't waste time as Brendan Shanahan scored just 23 seconds into the two-man advantage to tie the game 3-3. Janney found Hull in the slot, and Hull fired a rocket at Belfour. Jeff Brown collected the rebound and passed it to Shanahan in the left circle. Shanahan beat Belfour from a sharp angle. Just 17 seconds later, Hull scored the game winner for the Blues. Nelson Emerson broke in on right wing, carried the puck behind the net along with two Hawks defensemen. Emerson made a nice pass to an unchecked Hull in the slot, and Hull beat Belfour to put the Blues up 4-3. The Hawks had several chances to tie the game in the final minutes, but Joseph made some brilliant saves to prevent the Hawks from scoring. He stopped Troy Murray point blank from just right of the crease with 2:30 left in the game. The Blues killed off a late Hawks power play, with Rich Sutter clearing the puck with his hand as it was trickling along the goal line. The Blues held on to win the game. The Hawks oushot the Blues 13-7 in the third period, totaling 27 shots on goal for each team. The Blues special teams were excellent in the game. The Blues killed 6 of 7 Hawks power plays, and scored twice on on four power play chances. The Blues ranked among the best special teams in the league. They rank 2nd in penalty killing and 3rd on the power play. The game was carried live on ABC, the first time an NHL game other than an All-Star game has been shown on network television since May 24, 1980, when CBS carried Game 6 of the Stanley Cup finals. The best-of-seven series continues Wednesday in Chicago and Friday and Sunday in St. Louis. Box score --------- Blues 4, Blackhawks 3 BLUES 0 2 2 -- 4 CHICAGO 1 2 0 -- 3 FIRST PERIOD CHI -- Noonan 1 (Larmer, K.Brown), 8:17. Penalties -- Shanahan, StL (holding), 2:28; Zombo, StL (interference), 6:00; Murphy, Chi (high-sticking), 11:30; Grimson, Chi (boarding), 14:39; Zombo, StL (holding), 18:46. SECOND PERIOD STL -- Brown 1 (Shanahan, Emerson), 3:12. CHI -- (PPG) Noonan 2 (Roenick, Chelios), 5:40. CHI -- Noonan 3 (Matteau, Sutter), 8:51. STL -- Felsner 1 (McRae, Janney), 12:49. Penalties -- Baron, StL (interference), 4:33; Wilson, StL (tripping), 9:31. THIRD PERIOD STL -- (PPG) Shanahan 1 (J.Brown, Hull), 11:12. STL -- (PPG) Hull 1 (Emerson, J.Brown), 11:29. Penalties -- Shanahan, StL (roughing), 1:54; Matteau, Chi (high-sticking), 9:56; Smith, Chi (slashing), 10:49; Baron, StL (roughing), 14:23. SHOTS ON GOAL BLUES 10 10 7 -- 27 CHICAGO 9 5 13 -- 27 Power-play Opportunities -- St. Louis 2 of 4; Chicago 1 of 7. Goaltenders -- St. Louis, Joseph, 1-0-0 (27 shots-24 saves). Chicago, Belfour, 0-1-0 (27-23). Referee -- Kerry Fraser. Linesmen -- Kevin Collins, Brian Murphy. A -- 16,199. %*%*%*%**%*%%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%* * __ ______________ ____________________________________ % % \ \_)____________/ A L L E Z L E S B L U E S ! ! ! * * \ __________/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ % % \ ________/ * * \ _______/ Joe Ashkar % % \ \ Contact for the Blues * * \ \ SAINT LOUIS jca2@cec1.wustl.edu % % (___) BLUES * *%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%
10rec.sport.hockey
Apollo (now HP) have a graphics board that does 80-bit graphics. When I heard that, I jumped. The answer isn't that it can do 100 trillion-trillion- trillion colors. It actually does 10 planes of 8-bits (or 5 planes of 16 bits, etc.) for very fast graphics. douginoz.
1comp.graphics
In article <C5GE03.LIF@athena.cs.uga.edu> mcovingt@aisun3.ai.uga.edu (Michael Covington) writes: >... Patent law says you can build anything >you want to, for your own personal noncommercial use... I'm not up on the details of US patent law, but I think this is incorrect. There is a "reasonable use" exemption for *copyright*. There is none for *patents*. The exemptions from patent licensing are quite narrow; R&D work is exempt but personal use is not. That is, it's okay to experiment with a patented idea, but not to put it to practical use (e.g. to improve your stereo), even if it's only your own private practical use. Of course, it is unlikely that discreet personal use will ever be detected or that you will ever be sued over it. -- All work is one man's work. | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology - Kipling | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry
12sci.electronics
In article <1993Apr17.160731.3178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> alaa@peewee.unx.dec.com (Alaa Zeineldine) writes: >nstramer@supergas.dazixco.ingr.com (Naftaly Stramer) writes: >: >: THE HAMAS WAY of DEATH >: >: (Following is a transcript of a recruitment and training >: videotape made last summer by the Qassam Battalions, the military >> >Alaa Zeineldine While you brought up the separate question of Israel's unjustified policies and practices, I am still unclear about your reaction to the practices and polocies reflected in the article above. Tim
17talk.politics.mideast
In article <1993Apr13.150740.6221@iqsc.COM> rex@iqsc.COM (Rex Black) writes: >rail in Texas. Being from California, I have come to the conclusion >that one has two choices for preventing economic strangulation through >traffic: High speed rail or growth limits. > >Rex Growth limits? How will HSR help with the traffic congestion? From what I understand, the rail will not stop in places like Waco, or Bryan, or lots of intermediate places in between. Even though I live in Austin, I don't see myself using the train except on rare occasions. probably twice a year. And at $65 dollars a ticket I could probably drive for cheaper also. (even if the price of gas went up)
18talk.politics.misc
Had a deal with Jay Hayes from Deleware and was ripped off do not deal with this guy and if you know him go to his door with a bat! He lives in Deleware and I will post his full address later as well as his phone number in case any on e else wants to call and leave nasty messages. He will not return email and he will not return my phone calls I left a message iwth hgis roomate to call collect and hes not man enough. He still maintains net privilages, can we somehow get this turkey off the net. DA
6misc.forsale
THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary ___________________________________________________________________ For Immediate Release April 23, 1993 PRESS BRIEFING BY DEE DEE MYERS The Briefing Room 10:35 A.M. EDT MS. MYERS: At 1:00 p.m., we're having a press conference, Bill, in the East Room. And then Saturday the President will leave here at roughly 8:00 a.m. and fly down to Jamestown. He will spend the day there, overnight at Camp David. On Sunday, it's unclear exactly what time he'll leave Camp David and fly to Boston. He'll leave from Hagerstown. The press plane will leave from Washington. He will meet with some -- Q What kind of a plane is that he's taking? MS. MYERS: That he's taking? He'll probably take a C- 20. Q From Hagerstown? MS. MYERS: From Hagerstown. Air Force One doesn't fly out of Hagerstown, apparently. Q How will the pool travel? MS. MYERS: The pool will have to meet him ahead of time. So I guess the pool will travel with the press plane and wait for him at the airport. There is currently no provision -- and I'll double-check, because there's currently no provision -- I think that's standard operating practice. Q The pool is not going to meet him and watch him get on the plane at Hagerstown? MS. MYERS: I don't believe so. Q What time does he have to be in Boston? MS. MYERS: He's going to meet there with a group of citizens, mostly people who supported us during the campaign, at around 1:30 p.m. We're still working out the final times. Q At the airport? MS. MYERS: No, it will be at the Boston Harbor Hotel. And then he will also meet with some -- a youth group that authored something called Project 21. The speech to the publishers is actually at 3:15 p.m. It will be followed by Q&A. And then after the speech and Q&A, he'll attend a reception with the publishers, and then return to Washington from Boston. And that's it for the weekend. Q Has the President seen the report from -- or the letter, communication from the foreign service officers; also, obviously, the communication from Madeleine Albright? And what is his reaction to their call on him? MS. MYERS: Well, obviously, the letter was written to Secretary Christopher. I believe Secretary Christopher received the letter on Saturday. He reviewed it and met with the authors on Monday to discuss their views. He believes it's an important part of the policy-making process and is taking their views into account as we go forward in the development of the Bosnia policy. Q What is the President's reaction? MS. MYERS: The President hasn't seen the letter. It was something that was directed towards Secretary Christopher. In terms of -- he hasn't seen specifically the letter, but in terms of their concerns generally, what the President has said is that there are a lot of options on the table now, including ones that weren't there before. And I think he's, as is everybody, gravely concerned about the situation in Bosnia. Q Is he influenced by that? I mean, how does he feel about the fact that all of the specialists in that area -- those desk officers -- MS. MYERS: Many of the specialists in that area -- I think that that is clearly part of the process. It's something -- their views will clearly be considered. I think Secretary Christopher met with the group immediately to discuss their views. I think he believes that there ought to be room for opinions and that those opinions ought to be considered, particularly from people who work closely on the issues. Q What do you mean, there are options on the table that weren't there before? MS. MYERS: I think the President said last week that there were options, such as lifting the arms embargo to the Bosnian Muslims, that had been previously off the table that are now being considered. Q Dee Dee, in terms of those options, Madeleine Albright is saying that potentially there could be unilateral action by the U.S. if the Europeans did not go along. Is that on the table? MS. MYERS: Well, I can't discuss anything that would -- any conversations that would have happened between Ambassador Albright and the President. But I think the President has said he would certainly -- is working with our European allies. He's had a number of conversations with European leaders and is trying to build some consensus there. Q Will he reach a decision -- will he have anything specific to say today? MS. MYERS: No. I mean, in term of there will be no new announcement of policy today. Q Does your statement mean he has ruled out unilateral action? MS. MYERS: He's continuing to consult with our allies at this point. He has said -- I think he's been fairly clear about it, that the he believes that the U.S. needs to act in concert with its allies on this. Q On that point, does he believe that the U.S., though, does have built-in authority from the United Nations already to take unilateral action? MS. MYERS: Well, I think the U.N. Resolution 770 makes it clear that you can act unilaterally in support of any humanitarian relief effort. I think the broader point is that anything we do, any options that we decide to pursue we will make sure that it is consistent with U.N. authority, and if it's not, we'll work with our allies to make sure that we get it. Q Dee Dee, then how does the White House someone as distinguished as Elie Wiesel, who says that not enough is being done to stop the atrocities going on in Bosnia? MS. MYERS: I think that that's why we're considering additional options. I think that Mr. Wiesel's comments yesterday were quite compelling. The situation in Bosnia is tragic. The President is very concerned about it. He has -- I think President Clinton has worked very hard to take further actions to continue to isolate Serbia in the world community. Clearly, we're considering other options because the President is concerned that perhaps it's not enough. Q In terms of what you were just talking about, it sounds like Resolution 770 justifies unilateral action by the U.S. to protect humanitarian -- MS. MYERS: I don't think it -- I wouldn't use the word justify. It permits unilateral action by any country in protecting the delivery of humanitarian relief. But I think that's just an explanation of the resolution. I think any action that we take will be consistent with U.N. resolutions or we'll work with our allies to make sure that it is permissible or we'll get further action. Q The President and other officials have ruled out unilateral U.S. action in Bosnia in the past. You're declining to do that this morning. MS. MYERS: No, I said the President has said repeatedly that he wants to act in concert with our allies on this. Q That doesn't mean that he won't act alone, which has been said before explicitly. MS. MYERS: I don't mean to imply a change in policy. The President has said all along that he wants to act in concert with our allies on this. Q One other little question. Did he know about this letter from the foreign service officers before it hit the papers? MS. MYERS: I don't believe so. Secretary Christopher -- they may have had a private conversation about it. The President has not seen it. Q They met on Monday, right? Christopher met -- surely, he must have brought that up -- MS. MYERS: Again, they may have talked privately about it, but -- Q Dee Dee, what you're saying is that the Albright recommendation has been rejected, is that correct? MS. MYERS: No, I didn't say that at all. I said I won't -- I said I wouldn't comment on any conversations or communications. Q She's advocating unilateral action and you're saying, in effect, that we will not take unilateral action. MS. MYERS: I am not confirming anything that Madeleine Albright may or may not have recommended. Q Given the sometimes delicate, complicated and frustrating nature of negotiations with the allies on this issue, does the President find this kind of letter from 12 foreign service officers of the State Department helpful to that process, hurtful to that? MS. MYERS: I think that their views are obviously being considered. The Secretary received that memo on Saturday and two days later he met with them in order to have a more thorough airing of their views, of the basis for their views, to discuss in greater detail the options that they had presented in the letter. Q Doesn't it put some kind of pressure on -- additional pressure on him now from within his own administration to act regardless of what the allies may or may not do? MS. MYERS: I think clearly there's a broad policy review underway now. And the President and his advisors are considering a number of options, including some of those outlined in the letter from the folks over at the State Department. Now, no decisions have been made on that yet, but I think that there is a through review underway, and that their opinions are being very seriously considered. Q If I can just follow up, I guess what I'm looking for is what was his reaction to this letter? Did he say, good, this bolsters my position? Or did he say, damn, this is just what I don't need right now? MS. MYERS: I think he said this helps contribute substantively to the debate. It's important that all views be considered and aired thoroughly, that before he makes a decision he wants to have the best possible advice and information possible, and this, I think in many ways, furthers that goal. Q So internal advice to a Cabinet official or the President -- it's all open now, and you wouldn't take any umbrage or say that they were out of line? MS. MYERS: I think that the fact that Secretary Christopher met with them to discuss their views and make sure they had an opportunity to have a more complete conversation about it is conclusive evidence that their views are welcome. Q Does the policy review include what Madeleine Albright has suggested, and what Joe Biden and others have suggested, which is that the previous U.N. resolutions authorize unilateral action -- military action -- for the delivery of humanitarian -- MS. MYERS: I think all options are on the table. Q The unilateral option is on the table? MS. MYERS: I think all options are on the table. Q We've had two different -- Q Isn't that a change, Dee Dee? Q That would be a change of policy. Q Particularly if it includes ground troops, which has been specifically ruled out. MS. MYERS: I think the President has been -- well, no. I don't -- that is not -- Q Are you talking about all options? MS. MYERS: All options -- I think the President has been fairly clear about that. So let me just review again what he has said. He has said that -- the President has said all options are on the table, with the exception of the introduction of ground troops, which he has never suggested. He has ruled that out from the beginning. Q Hasn't he ruled out unilateral action of any sort? MS. MYERS: He has said that he doesn't believe the U.S. can solve the problems in the former Yugoslavia by itself. I think that there are a number of very complicated options on the table right now. I don't think that -- again, I don't want to comment on specific options that are being considered other than in the broad categories that we've already said -- things like lifting the arms embargo against the Bosnian Muslims, things that I think we've talked about in broad terms. This is a very complicated situation. The options being presented and considered are very complicated. Q Air strikes on the table? MS. MYERS: Again, I think that's been fairly clearly pointed out that that's something that's being discussed. Q Dee Dee, are ground troops on the -- MS. MYERS: No, ground troops are not being considered. Q You said there was not going to be -- you said you were not announcing a change of policy. Then you said everything is on the table. We're confused. Are unilateral actions on the table? MS. MYERS: All I can tell you is what the President has said -- that he doesn't believe -- that he wants to act in concert with the allies on this. Q Wants to, but he's willing to -- I mean, if they don't go along -- MS. MYERS: He's continuing to consult with our allies on this. He's continuing to have discussions. He's continuing to press them for further action. And I think that's clear. The conversation is ongoing. We're going to continue to work with them to find the best possible solution and next step on this. Q Dee Dee, the allies have taken the position that to conduct any kind of air strikes in Bosnia would have the opposite effect of ensuring the delivery of humanitarian aid; that they feel that their troops on the ground monitoring the delivery of that aid would become vulnerable and the Bosnians -- MS. MYERS: I'm not sure that's the consistent -- I mean, I'm not sure who you're referring to. Q The British and the French. Q Yes, the British and French. They've taken the position that the delivery of humanitarian aid would be jeopardized by any kind of air strikes against the Bosnian military. Does the U.S. believe differently from that? MS. MYERS: The President has had conversations with both Mitterrand and Major, as you know. I think that there is a thorough review of policy going on in those countries as well. And I don't want to comment on the nature of the President's discussions other than to say that he's continuing to consult with our allies as we move forward and he's continuing to press them for further action. And I think that process is ongoing. Q the other day voted against any military intervention yesterday. Does the President regard that as the end of the line or does he does still hold out some possibility of unilateral action? The allies have been very, very plain that they do not want to do anything. MS. MYERS: The consultations are ongoing. That's all I can tell you at this point. Q Are you saying that there won't be any announcement on Bosnia today in the press conference? MS. MYERS: No, that is not the intention of the press conference. Q What is the intention? MS. MYERS: It's an opportunity to take questions. He may have a brief -- I'm sure he'll have a brief opening statement, but it is not an opportunity to outline a new policy on Bosnia. That will not happen. Q Can you tell us what the subject of the opening statement is? MS. MYERS: It's sort of a general statement of where we are. Q After the first hundred days, you mean? MS. MYERS: It's not a long statement. I mean, this is just generally. Don't look for any major policy pronouncements. Q Do you know what the opening statement is? MS. MYERS: But it's -- perhaps later today I'll be able to tell you with more certainty -- I think that's still under review. But the overriding purpose of this -- it's not a mystery; it's not meant to be. It's just to take questions. Q It would be helpful to know whether -- what the opening statement is on. MS. MYERS: Since the major purpose here is just to take questions, it's not completely resolved yet. Q Dee Dee, one policy that was expected last week and that the White House, you and George seemed to indicate we might get, would be an AIDS czar. Will he announce that today? And what's the delay on that? MS. MYERS: I don't think we meant to imply -- I think we said it would happen soon. I don't think we meant to imply with any certainty that it would be this week. It is coming soon. I don't anticipate that happening today. Q What's the delay? Isn't this the perfect time to announce an AIDS czar? MS. MYERS: I don't know that it's a delay. I think the process is ongoing to find the best possible person and to go through the necessary background checks, and to make sure that we've crossed the t's and dotted the i's before we make an announcement. Q Dee Dee, what are Zoe Baird's qualifications for the Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board? And why wasn't her appointment announced here? MS. MYERS: The qualifications -- I don't know if there's a specific list; I'll have to check and see. I think there are a number of people there on the board with different backgrounds. Many of them have long histories in intelligence or other government service. I think there's a broad variety of views across political spectrum and across backgrounds that are represented there. We never made a formal announcement other than the Chairman of the Board, which is Admiral William Crowe. Q Why would he appoint her, though, if the American people and many in the Senate rejected her for another government job? MS. MYERS: I don't believe that the American people ever had -- voted on her. And I certainly -- she was never rejected in the Senate. She never went up there for a hearing. But the President believes she's a very competent person. He's said that -- Zoe Baird -- do you understand what the question is? Zoe Baird is on the President's Foreign Intelligence -- Q You said she never went up there for a hearing? Q Her nomination was withdrawn after public outrage over violating federal laws? MS. MYERS: Right, she never -- she was never -- but you said she was rejected by the Senate. I was just simply trying to point out that she was never voted on by the Senate. Q So you don't think that is any problem? MS. MYERS: I don't think there's any problem. Q She has been appointed to this board, is that a fact? MS. MYERS: Yes. Q Does she need confirmation for this? Does she need confirmation to be a member of the -- MS. MYERS: No. It's a presidential appointment. Q Usually, announcements are made here at the White House. Was there a decision not to announce her publicly? MS. MYERS: We didn't make an announcement. People who asked were told who the members of the board were. We didn't make an official announcement. If anybody's interested in that we can certainly put out the list of names. Q I'd like to know. Q Don't such board members -- don't you normally as a matter of -- routinely put out releases on all these boards and presidential appointment regardless of their dimension? MS. MYERS: Not always. But, again, I'm happy to put this out. Q Isn't that the standard practice? Q That was past practice. MS. MYERS: Again, I'm happy to put it out. We'll put out a list of the members of the board today. Q Dee Dee, I don't want to try to fail to let you get out of this swamp but -- (laughter) -- all I really want to know is hasn't it been the practice in this administration for such announcements to be made routinely? MS. MYERS: I think generally but not always. And we're happy to put that out today. Q What is the board, what is her title, what is the size of the board? MS. MYERS: There is roughly a dozen members on the board. It is a civilian board, although their are some, obviously, retired military personnel on the board that provide input into intelligence policy for the President. Again, the chairman of that board is Admiral William Crowe. Q And did he recommend Baird? Q What's the name of the board? MS. MYERS: It's the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, PFIAB. Q What's her qualification -- that she had employed an illegal alien? Is that -- (laughter) -- MS. MYERS: Do you want an answer to the question or you just want to make a joke? Q Let me phrase it another way. Why shouldn't this appointment be viewed as a pay-back for the difficulty she had a couple of months ago? MS. MYERS: Because it's not. Q What's her experience in foreign intelligence? MS. MYERS: She's an experienced attorney, someone who the President believes is very competent and qualified. And I think part of the mission of this board is to provide civilian input. Not everybody on the board is supposed to be an intelligence expert; that is not the board's mission. It is to provide civilian input for the President as he makes decisions regarding intelligence matters. He believes she's very qualified, very competent person, enormously talented and has said that throughout. Q Is this just a figment of my overactive imagination, or was there discussion early on about abolishing the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board? MS. MYERS: I don't think so. On December 24th, when he announced all of his foreign policy advisors he announced that he would -- had appointed Admiral Crowe as the head of the board. So I don't believe there's ever been any -- Q Earlier than that, during the transition. MS. MYERS: No, I don't believe so. It was announced, again, on December 24th. Admiral Crowe couldn't be there, but it was announced. Q Are members paid? MS. MYERS: I don't believe so, but I'll double-check. Q On another subject, on Waco, how do you explain the discrepancy between the federal reports of the autopsies of the bodies that are coming out of Waco and the state? I guess it's the Texas Ranger reports. MS. MYERS: Most of the information is coming -- the federal information is coming from the site. Clearly, there's been some discrepancies and the Justice Department is looking into it. Officials in the Justice Department were told, I believe the day before yesterday, that there were several bodies found with bullet holes. I think there's some discrepancy about that, and the Justice Department is looking into it. Q Is the President going to get involved in trying to sort out what seems to be becoming a jurisdictional morass down there, with some people withdrawing, others saying they're in charge, but others -- Justice, FBI, Texas Rangers -- all grabbing a piece of this? MS. MYERS: I don't know that he's going to try to mediate the dispute. I mean, I'll let you know if there's anything he intends to do about it. But as you know, there are several levels of investigation ongoing, and we're hopeful that they can work together. Q Is there any one agency or official down there in charge of everything? MS. MYERS: I don't know. I'll have to get back to you on that. Q What is the subject matter of Sunday's speech? MS. MYERS: It's going to be fairly general. I don't think it's going to be any specific announcements. I think it's going to be sort of a -- Q Does he have a topic that he's going to talk about? MS. MYERS: We're still working on it. But I wouldn't look for any announcements of, like, the drug czar or something like that. Q Is it sort of a 100 days speech, sort of "my excellent adventure for 100 days"? (Laughter.) MS. MYERS: Not exactly, but I think he'll take a little bit broader look about what's happened in the last -- Q Foreign, domestic? MS. MYERS: A little bit of both, but I think a lot of domestic. Q And overview. MS. MYERS: Yes, more of an overview than a specific policy announcement. Q Has there been an agreement yet on a forum by which the President will address the gay rights march on Sunday? MS. MYERS: It will be a letter read to the crowd by Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi. Q Is that available? MS. MYERS: Not yet, but it will be. Sure. Q Are you going to put it out here or -- MS. MYERS: We'll probably put it out here on Sunday. Q Travel next week? MS. MYERS: Unclear. Q What was the question? Q Likely? MS. MYERS: I don't -- Q Likely? Possible? MS. MYERS: Possible. Q What's possible? MS. MYERS: Travel. Q George mentioned yesterday campaign finance reform and national service legislative proposals next week. Do you have days yet for them? MS. MYERS: Not yet. Q Can you tell us which order? MS. MYERS: Campaign finance reform first; national service later in the week. Q Is there any coverage tomorrow in Williamsburg? MS. MYERS: No. Q And any report in the aftermath of the day? MS. MYERS: Any readout from the day? Q Readout. MS. MYERS: It's possible. Jeff Eller will be down there. I think he can go through what the President did during the day. We don't expect any photo op or anything, other than departure here in the morning. Q Dee Dee, the President has not made a regular practice, as some of his predecessors have, of going to Camp David. In fact, he's been there -- what -- once or twice? MS. MYERS: Twice. Q Why this weekend? MS. MYERS: He went two weekends ago, as you know, on the way home from his father-in-law's funeral. I think that they found it to be a good experience and a nice way for them to spend some time together as a family. And this is just an opportunity to do the same. Q There's no march there. Q It has nothing to do with the march here? MS. MYERS: No. Q Since he's going to be in town Sunday morning now instead of in Jamestown, have you thought about him making a quick pass-by, fly-over -- (laughter) -- MS. MYERS: He'll fly straight to Boston. Q Flying straight did you say? (Laughter.) Q George took a question yesterday on Waco. The President had said on Tuesday in the Rose Garden that there was a minor disagreement on tactics between the military advisors and the FBI. And the question was whether you knew exactly what that was and whether it related to the use of the particular kind of tear gas. Do you have an answer on that? MS. MYERS: I don't. I'll check. THE PRESS: Thank you. END10:59 A.M. EDT
18talk.politics.misc
In article <1993Apr5.125419.8157@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu> hasan@McRCIM.McGill.EDU writes: [After a small refresh Hasan got on the track again.] In article <FLAX.93Apr4151411@frej.teknikum.uu.se>, flax@frej.teknikum.uu.se (Jonas Flygare) writes: |> In article <1993Apr3.182738.17587@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu> hasan@McRCIM.McGill.EDU writes: |> In article <FLAX.93Apr3142133@frej.teknikum.uu.se>, flax@frej.teknikum.uu.se (Jonas Flygare) writes: |> |> I get the impression Hasan realized he goofed and is now |> |> trying to drop the thread. Let him. It might save some |> |> miniscule portion of his sorry face. |> Not really. since i am a logical person who likes furthering himself |> from any "name calling", i started trashing any article that contains |> such abuses without responding to, and sometimes not even reading articles |> written by those who acquired such bad habits from bad company! |> |> Ah, but in my followup on the subject (which you, by the way, never bothered |> responding to..) there was no name-calling. Hence the assumption. |> Do you feel more up to it now, so that we might have an answer? |> Or, to refresh your memory, does the human right issue in the area |> apply to Palestinians only? Also, do you claim there is such a thing as |> forfeiting a human right? If that's possible, then explain to the rest of |> us how there can exist any such thing? |> |> Use your logic, and convince us! This is your golden chance! |> Jonas Flygare, well , ok. let's see what Master of Wisdom, Mr. Jonas Flygare, wrote that can be wisdomely responded to : Are you calling names, or giving me a title? If the first, read your paragraph above, if not I accept the title, in order to let you get into the um, well, debate again. Master of Wisdom writes in <1993Mar31.101957@frej.teknikum.uu.se>: |> [hasan] |> |> [flax] |> |> |> [hasan] |> |> |> In case you didNOT know, Palestineans were there for 18 months. |> |> |> and they are coming back |> |> |> when you agree to give Palestineans their HUMAN-RIGHTS. |> |> |> Afterall, human rights areNOT negotiable. |> |> |> Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the right to one's life _also_ |> |> |> a 'human right'?? Or does it only apply to palestinians? |> |> No. it is EVERYBODY's right. However, when a killer kills, then he is giving |> |> up -willingly or unwillingly - his life's right to the society. |> |> the society represented by the goverment would exercise its duty by |> |> depriving the killer off his life's right. |> So then it's all right for Israel to kill the people who kill Israelis? |> The old 'eye for an eye' thinking? Funny, I thought modern legal systems |> were made to counter exactly that. So what do you expect me to tell you to tell you, Master of Wsidom, ^^^ ------------------------------------------------------------------ If you insist on giving me names/titles I did not ask for you could at least spell them correctly. /sigh. when you are intentionally neglecting the MOST important fact that the whole israeli presence in the occupied territories is ILLEGITIMATE, and hence ALL their actions, their courts, their laws are illegitimate on the ground of occupied territories. No, I am _not_ neglecting that, I'm merely asking you whether the existance of Israeli citicens in the WB or in Gaza invalidates those individuals right to live, a (as you so eloquently put it) human right. We can get back to the question of which law should be used in the territories later. Also, you have not adressed my question if the israelis also have human rights. What do you expect me to tell you, Master of Wisdom, when I did explain my point in the post, that you "responded to". The point is that since Israel is occupying then it is automatically depriving itself from some of its rights to the Occupied Palestineans, which is exactly similar the automatic deprivation of a killer from his right of life to the society. If a state can deprive all it's citizens of human rights by its actions, then tell me why _any_ human living today should have any rights at all? |> |> In conjugtion with the above, when a group of people occupies others |> |> territories and rule them by force, then this group would be -willingly or |> |> unwillingly- deprived from some of its rights. |> Such as the right to live? That's nice. The swedish government is a group |> of people that rule me by force. Does that give me the right to kill |> them? Do you consider yourself that you have posed a worthy question here ? Worthy or not, I was just applying your logic to a related problem. Am I to assume you admit it wouldn't hold? |> |> What kind of rights and how much would be deprived is another issue? |> |> The answer is to be found in a certain system such as International law, |> |> US law, Israeli law ,... |> And now it's very convenient to start using the legal system to prove a |> point.. Excuse me while I throw up. ok, Master of Wisdom is throwing up. You people stay away from the screen while he is doing it ! Oh did you too watch that comedy where they pipe water through the telephone? I'll let you in on a secret... It's not for real.. Take my word for it. |> |> It seems that the US law -represented by US State dept in this case- |> |> is looking to the other way around when violence occurs in occupied territories. |> |> Anyway, as for Hamas, then obviously they turned to the islamic system. |> And which system do you propose we use to solve the ME problem? The question is NOT which system would solve the ME problem. Why ? because any system can solve it. The laws of minister Sharon says kick Palestineans out of here (all palestine). I asked for which system should be used, that will preserve human rights for all people involved. I assumed that was obvious, but I won't repeat that mistake. Now that I have straightened that out, I'm eagerly awaiting your reply. Joseph Weitz (administrator responsible for Jewish colonization) said it best when writing in his diary in 1940: "Between ourselves it must be clear that there is no room for both peoples together in this country.... We shall not achieve our goal ^^^ ^^^ of being an independent people with the Arabs in this small country. The only solution is a Palestine, at least Western Palestine (west of the Jordan river) without Arabs.... And there is no other way than to transfer the Arabs from here to the neighbouring countries, to transfer all of them; not one village, not one tribe, should be left.... Only after this transfer will the country be able to absorb the millions of our own brethren. There is no other way out." DAVAR, 29 September, 1967 ("Courtesy" of Marc Afifi) Just a question: If we are to disregard the rather obvious references to getting Israel out of ME one way or the other in both PLO covenant and HAMAS charter (that's the english translations, if you have other information I'd be interested to have you translate it) why should we give any credence to a _private_ paper even older? I'm not going to get into the question if he wrote the above, but it's fairly obvious all parties in the conflict have their share of fanatics. Guess what..? Those are not the people that will make any lasting peace in the region. Ever. It's those who are willing to make a tabula rasa and start over, and willing to give in order to get something back. "We" and "our" either refers to Zionists or Jews (i donot know which). Well, i can give you an answer, you Master of Wisdom, I will NOT suggest the imperialist israeli system for solving the ME problem ! I think that is fair enough . No, that is _not_ an answer, since I asked for a system that could solve the problem. You said any could be used, then you provided a contradiction. Guess where that takes your logic? To never-never land. "The greatest problem of Zionism is Arab children". -Rabbi Shoham. Oh, and by the way, let me add that these cute quotes you put at the end are a real bummer, when I try giving your posts any credit. -- -------------------------------------------------------- Jonas Flygare, + Wherever you go, there you are V{ktargatan 32 F:621 + 754 22 Uppsala, Sweden +
17talk.politics.mideast
Static test firings are now scheduled for this Saturday.....after many schedule changes..... It may be difficult to get test status during the next two weeks....the number of contacts are drying up as they all go to New Mexico......GO DELTA CLIPPER!!
14sci.space
Once, on Jeopardy, the category was "Jewish Sports Heros," believe it or not. The answer was, "This pitcher had four no-hitters with the Dodgers in the 60s." The contestant said, "Who is Hank Aaron?" Alex Trebek said something like, "I don't think Hank Aaron was a pitcher." David Fry fry@math.harvard.edu Division of Applied Sciences fry@huma1.bitnet Harvard University ...!harvard!huma1!fry Cambridge, MA 02138
9rec.sport.baseball
Archive-name: space/schedule Last-modified: $Date: 93/04/01 14:39:23 $ SPACE SHUTTLE ANSWERS, LAUNCH SCHEDULES, TV COVERAGE SHUTTLE LAUNCHINGS AND LANDINGS; SCHEDULES AND HOW TO SEE THEM Shuttle operations are discussed in the Usenet group sci.space.shuttle, and Ken Hollis (gandalf@pro-electric.cts.com) posts a compressed version of the shuttle manifest (launch dates and other information) periodically there. The manifest is also available from the Ames SPACE archive in SPACE/FAQ/manifest. The portion of his manifest formerly included in this FAQ has been removed; please refer to his posting or the archived copy. For the most up to date information on upcoming missions, call (407) 867-INFO (867-4636) at Kennedy Space Center. Official NASA shuttle status reports are posted to sci.space.news frequently. WHY DOES THE SHUTTLE ROLL JUST AFTER LIFTOFF? The following answer and translation are provided by Ken Jenks (kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov). The "Ascent Guidance and Flight Control Training Manual," ASC G&C 2102, says: "During the vertical rise phase, the launch pad attitude is commanded until an I-loaded V(rel) sufficient to assure launch tower clearance is achieved. Then, the tilt maneuver (roll program) orients the vehicle to a heads down attitude required to generate a negative q-alpha, which in turn alleviates structural loading. Other advantages with this attitude are performance gain, decreased abort maneuver complexity, improved S-band look angles, and crew view of the horizon. The tilt maneuver is also required to start gaining downrange velocity to achieve the main engine cutoff (MECO) target in second stage." This really is a good answer, but it's couched in NASA jargon. I'll try to interpret. 1) We wait until the Shuttle clears the tower before rolling. 2) Then, we roll the Shuttle around so that the angle of attack between the wind caused by passage through the atmosphere (the "relative wind") and the chord of the wings (the imaginary line between the leading edge and the trailing edge) is a slightly negative angle ("a negative q-alpha"). This causes a little bit of "downward" force (toward the belly of the Orbiter, or the +Z direction) and this force "alleviates structural loading." We have to be careful about those wings -- they're about the most "delicate" part of the vehicle. 3) The new attitude (after the roll) also allows us to carry more mass to orbit, or to achieve a higher orbit with the same mass, or to change the orbit to a higher or lower inclination than would be the case if we didn't roll ("performance gain"). 4) The new attitude allows the crew to fly a less complicated flight path if they had to execute one of the more dangerous abort maneuvers, the Return To Launch Site ("decreased abort maneuver complexity"). 5) The new attitude improves the ability for ground-based radio antennae to have a good line-of-sight signal with the S-band radio antennae on the Orbiter ("improved S-band look angles"). 6) The new attitude allows the crew to see the horizon, which is a helpful (but not mandatory) part of piloting any flying machine. 7) The new attitude orients the Shuttle so that the body is more nearly parallel with the ground, and the nose to the east (usually). This allows the thrust from the engines to add velocity in the correct direction to eventually achieve orbit. Remember: velocity is a vector quantity made of both speed and direction. The Shuttle has to have a large horizontal component to its velocity and a very small vertical component to attain orbit. This all begs the question, "Why isn't the launch pad oriented to give this nice attitude to begin with? Why does the Shuttle need to roll to achieve that attitude?" The answer is that the pads were leftovers from the Apollo days. The Shuttle straddles two flame trenches -- one for the Solid Rocket Motor exhaust, one for the Space Shuttle Main Engine exhaust. (You can see the effects of this on any daytime launch. The SRM exhaust is dirty gray garbage, and the SSME exhaust is fluffy white steam. Watch for the difference between the "top" [Orbiter side] and the "bottom" [External Tank side] of the stack.) The access tower and other support and service structure are all oriented basically the same way they were for the Saturn V's. (A side note: the Saturn V's also had a roll program. Don't ask me why -- I'm a Shuttle guy.) I checked with a buddy in Ascent Dynamics. He added that the "roll maneuver" is really a maneuver in all three axes: roll, pitch and yaw. The roll component of that maneuver is performed for the reasons stated. The pitch component controls loading on the wings by keeping the angle of attack (q-alpha) within a tight tolerance. The yaw component is used to determine the orbital inclination. The total maneuver is really expressed as a "quaternion," a grad-level-math concept for combining all three rotation matrices in one four-element array. HOW TO RECEIVE THE NASA TV CHANNEL, NASA SELECT NASA SELECT is broadcast by satellite. If you have access to a satellite dish, you can find SELECT on Satcom F2R, Transponder 13, C-Band, 72 degrees West Longitude, Audio 6.8, Frequency 3960 MHz. F2R is stationed over the Atlantic, and is increasingly difficult to receive from California and points west. During events of special interest (e.g. shuttle missions), SELECT is sometimes broadcast on a second satellite for these viewers. If you can't get a satellite feed, some cable operators carry SELECT. It's worth asking if yours doesn't. The SELECT schedule is found in the NASA Headline News which is frequently posted to sci.space.news. Generally it carries press conferences, briefings by NASA officials, and live coverage of shuttle missions and planetary encounters. SELECT has recently begun carrying much more secondary material (associated with SPACELINK) when missions are not being covered. AMATEUR RADIO FREQUENCIES FOR SHUTTLE MISSIONS The following are believed to rebroadcast space shuttle mission audio: W6FXN - Los Angeles K6MF - Ames Research Center, Mountain View, California WA3NAN - Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), Greenbelt, Maryland. W5RRR - Johnson Space Center (JSC), Houston, Texas W6VIO - Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), Pasadena, California. W1AW Voice Bulletins Station VHF 10m 15m 20m 40m 80m ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ----- ----- W6FXN 145.46 K6MF 145.585 7.165 3.840 WA3NAN 147.45 28.650 21.395 14.295 7.185 3.860 W5RRR 146.64 28.400 21.350 14.280 7.227 3.850 W6VIO 224.04 21.340 14.270 W6VIO 224.04 21.280 14.282 7.165 3.840 W1AW 28.590 21.390 14.290 7.290 3.990 W5RRR transmits mission audio on 146.64, a special event station on the other frequencies supplying Keplerian Elements and mission information. W1AW also transmits on 147.555, 18.160. No mission audio but they transmit voice bulletins at 0245 and 0545 UTC. Frequencies in the 10-20m bands require USB and frequencies in the 40 and 80m bands LSB. Use FM for the VHF frequencies. [This item was most recently updated courtesy of Gary Morris (g@telesoft.com, KK6YB, N5QWC)] SOLID ROCKET BOOSTER FUEL COMPOSITION Reference: "Shuttle Flight Operations Manual" Volume 8B - Solid Rocket Booster Systems, NASA Document JSC-12770 Propellant Composition (percent) Ammonium perchlorate (oxidizer) 69.6 Aluminum 16 Iron Oxide (burn rate catalyst) 0.4 Polybutadiene-acrilic acid-acrylonitrile (a rubber) 12.04 Epoxy curing agent 1.96 End reference Comment: The aluminum, rubber, and epoxy all burn with the oxidizer. NEXT: FAQ #10/15 - Historical planetary probes
14sci.space
In article <1993Apr15.231515.19982@rambo.atlanta.dg.com> wpr@atlanta.dg.com (Bill Rawlins) writes: > An atonement (Jesus) is needed to atone for sin. My only bitch about this atonement is the shoddy workmanship. Hell, you'd think an omnipotent being could at least manage his own suicide. If god had *really* died on Calvary, that would truly be something to cheer about. /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ Bob Beauchaine bobbe@vice.ICO.TEK.COM They said that Queens could stay, they blew the Bronx away, and sank Manhattan out at sea. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
19talk.religion.misc
In article <1993Apr20.040449.19649@twg.com> q@twg.com (Michael Wiesenberg) writes: >Anyway, is anyone aware of a comparitive study of the two programs? >Or can someone just give me their own personal impressions? Maybe PC Magazine, January 12, 1993 had a review of several personal finance management programe, as did PC-Computing, January 1993. PC World, December 1992 also had articles about Quicken and Managing Your Money. I can email you copies of these articles if you can't find them at your library. I've been using Managing Your Money for several years, and I have several friends who use Quicken, though I've not used it myself. My overall impression is that Quicken is a financial accounts manager while Managing Your Money will help you more completely manage your finances. Here are some features that I believe Managing Your Money and Quicken share: The ability to keep records for each of your financial accounts: checking, savings, charge, cash, or brokerage. You can reconcile your account statements with the records the program keeps. The ability to make a budget and track your spending against that budget. A Checkfree module which will allow you to use the Checkfree bill paying service to pay your bills via your modem. The ability to print checks on your printer. The ability to keep loan records and set up automatic loan payments. The ability to import stock quotations to keep your brokerage accounts up to date. I know Managing Your Money can do this automatically via modem. Quicken probably can as well, but I'm not sure about it. The ability to export tax information to popular tax preparation programs. Here are some features that I believe Managing Your Money has that Quicken does not: A tax prediction module. This looks at your accounts and budget to predict your tax liability for the coming year. It's usefull to fine tune your withholding so Uncle Sam doesn't get his due too early. An insurance and vital records module. This is a place to keep records of your insurance policies as well as other vital records. It can also compute your life expectancy. A financial analysis module. This computes compound interest, effects of inflation, loan payments term or interest, yield to maturity for bonds, savings account yields, days between dates, and loan amortization schedules. It also has functions to help you decide whether to refinance your mortgage, whether you can afford a particular home, whether a particular rental property is a good investment, whether you should buy lease or rent, and whether a particular investment's cash flow is adequate for your situation. This module can also help you plan for retirement and for helping your kids with their tuition. A net worth module. This is a place to record all your assets and liabilities. Your net worth can be computed from this information. Any assets or liabilities recorded in other modules are automatically included here. A "desk" module. This includes a small word processor, a card file you can use to store names, addresses, phone numbers and other vital information about friends and associates, a perpetual calander, a rudimentary calculator, a to-do list, a reminder list, an appointment list, and a place to record your phone calls (for those who need to track such things). Your appointments, reminders and to-do list can be made to display automatically when you start the program. There are probably some things listed above that Quicken has, but I'm almost sure that Quicken doesn't do everything I've listed. If I'm wrong, I'm sure hordes of Quicken devotees will flame me to a crisp. One thing that Quicken has that Managing Your Money does not yet have is a Windows version. MECA software is rumored to be working on a Windows version of Managing Your Money for release late this year. I hope this information is of use to you. I've found Managing Your Money to be a very usefull program for keeping my financial records. On the other hand I know many people who are equally as happy with Quicken. If Quicken has all the features you need or want, I'd go with it. If you find any of the Managing Your Money features that Quicken doesn't have to be useful, I think it's well worth the price.
2comp.os.ms-windows.misc
In article <1993Apr1.230642.5207@cbfsb.cb.att.com> ykhsu@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (yung-kao.hsu) writes: > > I am the person who started out this subject. > > To me, the question really is not about dealer profit but the > amount of money for the type of car. I've settled with a > new 92 Subaru Wagon with the similar amount of money a Saturn > dealer asked for a SW1. OK, I know it's a 92 model, but I think > I got a better car (though I have to adjust my initial idea of > why I am getting a new car). > > Today, during a conversion with a friend, I learned he rejected > a Saturn for a Ford Tarurs; as it only costed him a little bit more > than a SL2. I may be wrong, but a loaded Tarus beats a Saturn SL2. I agree that a fully-loaded SL2 would come close in price to a LOWER-END Ford Taurus. A FULLY-LOADED Taurus, on the other hand, would still be substantially more expensive than even the most glitzy SL2. A fully loaded SL2 would run somewhere around $17,000, while a fully loaded Taurus LX would be somewhere around the $22,000-$23,000 range. A base Taurus (GL I believe) might start around $15,000. Of course there is the Taurus SHO which can push $30,000 if you really try, but this is a totally different car than your mainstream Taurus sedan. Your statement was not entirely faulty, just a little inaccurate. > > I can't see Saturn is of better value and that is why I was puzzled > by its pricings. Oh, we did not spend much time getting our deals; > being better informed has its advantages. Well, that's ok. At least you're not bitching about dealer profits like some of the other netters are. You seem to have rationally picked out the car that is best for you. The Loyale is an aging design that is about to be replaced by the Impreza wagon, so you probably got a good deal on one of the last ones. > > Then again, I may be wrong. > >Yung-Kao Hsu > Mihir Shah mps1@cec1.wustl.edu
7rec.autos
In article <1993Apr21.183307.18345@rosevax.rosemount.com> grante@aquarius.rosemount.com (Grant Edwards) writes: > >Jesus allowed himself to be killed. Many of his followers have killed >and died for _thier_ beliefs. Sorry, I don't see the difference. I think the subtle difference here is that Koresh took his own life before he could be prosecuted. Jesus allowed himself to be captured, and tried, and was sentenced to death. That's a big difference, whether you're Christian or not. That and the fact that the Bible goes on to say that he "arose again on the third day". Now, if Koresh manages that one.... :) (Note that I'm not admitting to being of the religions stated above...just pointing out the story the way the Bible tells it). -- John Mechalas "I'm not an actor, but mechalas@gn.ecn.purdue.edu I play one on TV." Aero Engineering, Purdue University #include disclaimer.h
18talk.politics.misc
In article <1r39kh$itp@horus.ap.mchp.sni.de> frank@D012S658.uucp (Frank O'Dwyer) writes: >Specifically, I'd like to know what relativism concludes when two >people grotesquely disagree. Is it: > >(a) Both are right > >(b) One of them is wrong, and sometimes (though perhaps rarely) we have a > pretty good idea who it is > >(c) One of them is wrong, but we never have any information as to who, so > we make our best guess if we really must make a decision. > >(d) The idea of a "right" moral judgement is meaningless (implying that > whether peace is better than war, e.g., is a meaningless question, > and need not be discussed for it has no correct answer) > >(e) Something else. A short, positive assertion would be nice. (e). (d) is close but misses the point that there is a third party, with their own subjective viewpoint, asked to make a decision. Peace is not "better" than war, unless we view the situation subjectively as humans. Of course, we *are* humans, and so *do* view situations from our own perspective, so it is meaningful for us to discuss questions of war and peace. -- Jim Perry perry@dsinc.com Decision Support, Inc., Matthews NC These are my opinions. For a nominal fee, they can be yours.
0alt.atheism
Mark Bergman (bergman@panix.com) wrote: : To those of you who have the BMW heated handgrips: : What are they like during the summer? Yes, you : wiseguy, I mean while they are off! : Are they comfortable? Do they transmit a lot of : vibration? How do they compare to the stock grips? : To foam grips? : Do they really make a difference during the winter? I just got a K75 and had the heated grips installed. As far as I can tell the grips look and feel the same as the standard grips. They are *not* soft. Last weekend I did a 500 mile round-trip and got to a point where it was in the 30s and raining. Those heated grips were *great*. I've only had the bike a month and the heated grips are already one of my favorite features on the bike. -- ******************************************************************************* * Bill Ranck (703) 231-9503 Bill.Ranck@vt.edu * * Computing Center, Virginia Polytchnic Inst. & State Univ., Blacksburg, Va. * *******************************************************************************
8rec.motorcycles
G. Wayne Nichols (gwni@troi.cc.rochester.edu) wrote: > I have a 386/40 motherboard with AMI BIOS. [..] > After multiple reboots, now it only gives 10 beeps and sits there? Referring to the manual of my motherboard with AMI-BIOS, 10 beeps are a 'CMOS Shutdown Register Read/Write Error', if the system stops after these beeps. If the system continues, it is a 'Keyboard error'. Michael -- * michael@jester.gun.de * Michael Gerhards * Preussenstrasse 59 * * Germany 4040 Neuss * Voice: 49 2131 82238 *
3comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
In article <1993Apr21.180216.7431@gn.ecn.purdue.edu> mechalas@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (John P. Mechalas) writes: >In article <C5uD1u.3oy@apollo.hp.com> goykhman@apollo.hp.com (Red Herring) writes: >>In article <1993Apr20.210651.5687@gn.ecn.purdue.edu> mechalas@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (John P. Mechalas) writes: >>>>Although I'm an atheist, the events in Waco have really sickened me. It's >>>>truely a sad day for religious freedom in this country. The Branch >>>>Dividians may have been nutty (my general opinion of all religious people), >>>>but tax evasion and illegal possesion of firearms are certainly not grounds >>>>for destroying a people. >>> >>>Excuse me? WHO destroyed the BD's? Last I knew, they burned themselves... >> >> Where did you get this information? The FBI stated they were not >> aware of any mass suicide plans, ditto Koresh's attorneys who appeared >> on Larry King's Live yesterday, and the survivors claim the fire was started >> from the outside... > >So what if the FBI wasn't aware of suicide plans? That means that BD's had no plans to commit suecide. This may not even be an >]accurate statement, anyway, since the last report of listening devices used >in the compound may reveal new information. We'll have to wait. Are you saying the FBI may have actually received information that BD's were going to burn themselves alive and did not stop the assault? Even if that were true, you gotta be kidding if you expect them to release that kind of information to the public. > And what did you expect Koresh's attorneys to say? Their credibility >is shot anyway, since they *origianlly* said that Koresh was going to surrender >after the Passover. We saw how accurate that was. That's not what Koresh's attorney said on Larry King's Live. He said that Koresh was not going to come out before the Passover, and that he and his leutenant were "working day and night" on some kind of religious manuscript (something about the Seven Seals) and that once they finished they would come out. K.'s attorney also said that the day before the assault an armored vehicle delivered typewriter supplies to the compound, and that the FBI promised many times there would not be another attack, that the matters would be resolved peacefully. > And the survivors claim the fire was started from the outside. Outside >meaning outside the compound? No, they meant that BD's did not set the place on fire. Yes, the FBI reported seeing two people >(according to CNN reports) using torches to set the compound on fire. They >were outside. That was the initial claim, but I do not believe it has been repeated since. Anyway, I'd like to see a tape. The FBI surely videotaped the whole operation. All conversations must have been recorded too. How come the two were not shot by the FBI snipers? > > Either way, I have evidence to support the theory that the BD's burned >themselves. What evidence? > You made a serious implication that the FBI was responsible >for the fire and the "destruction of the people". > All you have done is >put doubt on who started the fire without providing any evidence to back >up your claim that the FBI was responsible. That is what the survivors claim. I'd like to see some evidence that people that everyone agrees were not going to commit suecide actually did it. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Disclaimer: Opinions expressed are mine, not my employer's. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18talk.politics.misc
In article <2062@rwing.UUCP> pat@rwing.UUCP (Pat Myrto) writes: ><Ignoring the National Guard or state militias being called out to ><deal with mine strikers and the like...didn't the army get called in ><during the '20s to deal with a bunch of WW1 veterans who came out to ><protest the government's (mis)handling of their rights? >< ><Somebody named MacArthur ran the field end of the operation. > >Wasn't that the 'Bonus Rebellion', when tanks were deployed against >US Citizens? Grist for those who insist 'It couldn't happen here...' But also grist for those who think that when such things DO happen it means the end of the Republic is imminent. The Bonus March was 61 year ago. ---peter
18talk.politics.misc
In article <1993Apr6.004325.48859@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>, jamiller@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes: > The following are for sale (duh...:) > > Golden Image 400dpi B&W Hand Scanner & Dpaint III > $70 > > Amiga Vision - mulitmedia authorizing software > $30 > > Baud Bandit - terminal communication software > $10 > > The Bard's Tale III: Thief of Fate - graphic RPG > $15 > > F-29 Retaliator - flight simulator > $15 > > Future Wars - fantasy/scifi graphic RPG > $15 > > RVF Honda - Motocycle simulation > $10 > > Patlabor Ingram and Phantom Labor models - Japanese Anime models > $15 > > Robotech RPG books (English): > > The Ingrid Invasion > $10 > > Southern Cross > $10 > > Battletech Books (English): > > The Fox's Teeth: Exploits of McKinnon's Raiders > $5 > > Gray Death Legion > $5 > > Mercenary's Handbook > $15 > > CityTech > $15 > > Aerotech > $15 > > Mechwarrior > $15 > > AD&D Books: > > Monster Manual > $5 > > Monster Manual II > $5 > > Fiend Folio > $5 > > Lots of books in Japanese and English on subjects of: Japanese > Culture, Asian Art History, Japanese Language, Socio-linguistics, > Ethnography, Linguistics, Physics, Calculaus (Menum and Folis), Unix > and Amiga Programming, Economics (Micro, Macro, Intl. Trade & Finance, > American Economic Development), and Philosophy (Language, Ethics, > Cognition, Science). If there's something you think you might be > interested in let me know and I'll tell you what I have. > -- > jamiller@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu > James Miller > > _chicchai .sig no ho ga ichiban iin janai ka..._ > Enlightenment Happens? -- jamiller@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu James Miller _chicchai .sig no ho ga ichiban iin janai ka..._ Enlightenment Happens?
6misc.forsale
Hi, I have a Quantum ProDrive LPS 40 MB SCSI hard drive for sale. It came with my MacIIsi and was replaced by a larger hard drive. In great working condition. Fast and quiet. Never had a problem. Asking $100+COD shipping or reasonable offer. Also for sale with the drive: Brand new mounting bracket for MacII or MacSE. It also includes SCSI data and power cable. $10 with the HD. Please reply with email or call (217)337-5710 and leave message. Thanks. Ding-Kai Chen dcg6759@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu uiuc.classifieds uiuc.classifieds.computer misc.forsale misc.forsale.computer misc.forsale.computer.mac misc.forsale.computer.other misc.forsale.computer.pc-clone
6misc.forsale
In article <CMM.0.90.2.735315429.thomasp@holmenkollen.ifi.uio.no>, Thomas Parsli <thomasp@ifi.uio.no> writes: > 1. Make a new Newsgroup called talk.politics.guns.PARANOID or > talk.politics.guns.THEY'R.HERE.TO.TAKE.ME.AWAY Well, may I point out that paranoia is an IRRATIONAL fear, without basis in reality. As we've seen here in the US, there is nothing irrational about it. Perhaps you folks in Finland have been down on your knees being good little boys and girls so that the former Soviet Union didn't come across the border and stomp the snot out of you for so long that you just figure everybody should be so accomodating to tyranny. > > 2. Move all postings about waco and burn to (guess where).. > > 3. Stop posting #### on this newsgroup If you don't like us talking about political issues involving attacks on people for owning guns, don't read talk.politics.guns. > > We are all SO glad you're trying to save us from the evil > goverment, but would you mail this #### in regular mail to > let's say 1000 people ???? > Nobody's trying to save YOU from anything, so butt out. I couldn't care less about what somebody on the other side of the world thinks about this. Of course, you do have a right to an opinion... but I've always figured that opinons are like hemmorhoids. Every asshole's got them, I just don't care about yours. ************************************************************************** * I remember what I was doing * Bad boy, whatcha gonna do * * when I heard that JFK had been shot. * Whatcha gonna do * * Will you remember the Battle of Waco? * when they come for you... * *************************************************************************** Ken Whitehead (kdw@odin.icd.ab.com)
16talk.politics.guns
In article <1993Apr16.155123.447@cunews.carleton.ca> wcsbeau@alfred.carleton.ca (OPIRG) writes: >In article <1993Apr14.122647.16364@tms390.micro.ti.com> david@tms390.micro.ti.com (David Thomas) writes: > >>>In article <13APR199308003715@delphi.gsfc.nasa.gov>, packer@delphi.gsfc.nasa.gov (Charles Packer) writes: >>>>Is there such a thing as MSG (monosodium glutamate) sensitivity? >>>>I saw in the NY Times Sunday that scientists have testified before >>>>an FDA advisory panel that complaints about MSG sensitivity are >>>>superstition. Anybody here have experience to the contrary? >>>> >>>>I'm old enough to remember that the issue has come up at least >>>>a couple of times since the 1960s. Then it was called the >>>>"Chinese restaurant syndrome" because Chinese cuisine has >>>>always used it. >> >>So far, I've seen about a dozen posts of anecdotal evidence, but >>no facts. I suspect there is a strong psychological effect at >>work here. Does anyone have results from a scientific study >>using double-blind trials? > >Check out #27903, just some 20 posts before your own. Maybe you missed >it amidst the flurry of responses? Yet again, the use of this >newsgroup is hampered by people not restricting their posts to matters >they have substantial knowledge of. > >For cites on MSG, look up almost anything by John W. Olney, a >toxicologist who has studied the effects of MSG on the brain and on >development. It is undisputed in the literature that MSG is an >excitotoxic food additive, and that its major constituent, glutamate >is essentially the premierie neurotransmitter in the mammalian brain >(humans included). Too much in the diet, and the system gets thrown >off. Glutamate and aspartate, also an excitotoxin are necessary in >small amounts, and are freely available in many foods, but the amounts >added by industry are far above the amounts that would normally be >encountered in a ny single food. By eating lots of junk food, >packaged soups, and diet soft drinks, it is possible to jack your >blood levels so high, that anyone with a sensitivity to these >compounds will suffer numerous *real* physi9logical effects. >Read Olney's review paper in Prog. Brain Res, 1988, and check *his* >sources. They are impecable. There is no dispute. > > --Dianne Murray wcsbeau@ccs.carleton.ca In order to excitotoxin effects of MSG, MSG that in blood must go through blood-brain barrier that I am not sure MSG can go through or not. In normal condition, the concentration of glutamate in the cerebrospinal fluid is about 2 uM that is high enough to activate one type of glutamate receptor-the NMDA receptor. But the question is Neuron and glial cell in the brain have a lots of transport to get glutamate into Neuron or glial. So no one know exact concentration of glutamate is around neurons. Glutamate is most important neurotransmitter in the central nervous system. It is involved in not only in daily life like the controling of movement, it is alsoinvolved in develpoment, memory and learn (it is involved in Logn-term potentialtion that be thought is the basis of learning).
13sci.med
Vesselin Bontchev (bontchev@fbihh.informatik.uni-hamburg.de) writes: >>Markowitz@DOCKMASTER.NCSC.MIL writes: >>> It is interesting to note in this regard that permission to export >>> PKZIP's encryption scheme has twice been denied by NSA. Draw you own >>> conclusions. >>Uh, I'm afraid that your information is slightly out of date... PKWare >>has obtained a license to export their program to the whole world, >>except a very limited list of countries... Draw your own conclusions >>about the strength of the algorithm... :-) Sorry if I was less than clear. :-) I was referring to our own efforts to receive export permission from NSA for the PKZIP encryption algorithm, not to any effort on the part of Phil Katz or PKWare. I should point out that the original version of this algorithm was designed by Roger Schlafly and that WE (meaning Roger and myself) were twice denied an export license for it. The second go 'round was just this past fall. I had no knowledge of Phil's attempts in this. I do not even *know* for sure if he choose to implement the algorithm as it was designed by Roger, though I *believe* that was at least the case for versions prior to 2.0. And then there's the question of key management. :-) And even if our applications were identical, there is no reason to assume the NSA would treat them that way. :-) -mjm ---------- Michael J. Markowitz, VP R&D markowitz@dockmaster.ncsc.mil Information Security Corp. 708 405-0500, fax: 708 405-0506 1141 Lake Cook Rd., Suite D MCI: 363-1959 Deerfield, IL 60302 CIS: 76206,2617
11sci.crypt
hartzler@cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com (Jerry Hartzler - CATS) writes: >In article <1993Apr18.100318.12715@aber.ac.uk> azw@aber.ac.uk (Andy Woodward) writes: >>I generally find that after two or three decent hits of nitrous, my riding >>>improves enormously. Drinking is silly, your breath smells, it costs lots >>>of money and the pigs can detect it with their machines. NO2 works for me, >>>try it. >> >>And its free.... just sit behind an old car in a jam, and breathe deeply. >Only if there is a dentist in the car :-) Otherwise you get NO2 out the back. >Me thinks you gots your gases confused. What comes out of cars is >Carbon Monoxide. What comes out of whippits is Nitrous Oxide. CO N2O
8rec.motorcycles
Isn't Clipper a trademark of Fairchild Semiconductor? Andy Hooper
11sci.crypt
FOR SALE: **************************************************************** 386-40 with VGA Color Monitor, dual floppy, VGA card with 1MB on board, joystick, mouse, 2 MB RAM, no hard drive. FOR ONLY $500! Respond quickly! -- ***** Orion Auld ***** *----------------------------------------------* "We are only fabulous | If you're not part of the solution, | beasts, after all." | You're part of the precipitate. | -- John Ashberry *----------------------------------------------*
6misc.forsale
Tarl Neustaedter (tarl@coyoacan.sw.stratus.com) wrote: : It means that the EFF's public stance is complicated with issues irrelevant : to the encryption issue per se. There may well be people who care about : the encryption issue who don't care to associate themselves with the : network erotica issue (or may even disagree with the EFF's position). Perhaps these encryption-only types would defend the digitized porn if it was posted encrypted? These issues are not as seperable as you maintain.
11sci.crypt
Hello, I am writing a program which forks of a number of child processes and each of the children printing things on the screen (quite messy in one window)... The "xterm -Sxxd" option seems to be the solution to opening up slave windows only to display output and I use the following code to open up a pty (taken from Stevens)...and manage to open up an x-term successfully.... The problem however is how do I write into this x-term ? Please help! static char pty_name[12]; int pty_master( void ); int pty_master( void ) { int i,fd; char* ptr; struct stat statbuff; static char ptychar[] = "pqrs"; static char hexdigit[] = "0123456789abcdef"; for( ptr = ptychar; *ptr!=0; ptr++ ) { strcpy( pty_name, "/dev/ttyXY" ); pty_name[8] = *ptr; pty_name[9] = '0'; if( stat( pty_name, &statbuff) < 0 ) break; for( i=0; i < 16; i++ ) { pty_name[9] = hexdigit[i]; if( (fd = open( pty_name, O_RDWR )) >= 0 ) return( fd ); } } return(-1); } -- Vinod email : vinod@ee.wpi.edu An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind -Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi
5comp.windows.x
In article <1993Apr30.173625.10139@unocal.com> stgprao@st.unocal.COM (Richard Ottolini) writes: > In article <C6B2pA.My4@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> turner@bigbang.astro.indiana.edu (George Wm Turner) writes: > > > >an image of the moon has been caught in a weather satellite images of the earth. > >it appears in both the 0430-1500UT ir and visual images of the earth. > >the GIF images can be down loaded from vmd.cso.uiuc.edu and are named > >CI043015.GIF and CV043015.GIF for the IR and visual images respectively. > > > >pretty cool pictures; in the ir it's saturated but in the visual image > >details on the moon are viewable. > > Near midsummer, you can see the relfection of the Sun in the ocean. > Also during solar eclise you can see the shadow of the sun move > across the clouds. Speaking of which, a paper was out a few years ago about a weather sat imaging a lunar eclipse -- are those images uploaded anywhere? I could dig out the reference if there's interest. Shag -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rob Unverzagt | shag@aerospace.aero.org | Tuesday is soylent green day. unverzagt@courier2.aero.org |
14sci.space
rickc@krill.corp.sgi.com (Richard Casares) writes: >In article <1993Apr5.190141.17623@bsu-ucs>, 00bjgood@leo.bsuvc.bsu.edu >writes: >|> I just wanted to let everyone know that I have lost what little respect >|> I have >|> for Jim LeFebvre after seeing today's Cubs game. >|> A dishard Cub fan >Yes, I also wonder if they can win with this manager. >I never believed managers had that much to do with winning >until I saw how much they had to do with losing.... I like the Mariners a lot, but my heart belongs to the Cubs...You can imagine my frustration when I saw the Cubs nabbing LeFebvre...ARHGGHRGHH! -John Neuharth neuharth@u.washington.edu
9rec.sport.baseball
-*---- I wrote: >> The diaries of the followers of the Maharishi, formerly of >> Oregon, are historical evidence. In article <2944756297.1.p00261@psilink.com> "Robert Knowles" <p00261@psilink.com> writes: > Are you confusing Bhagwan Rajneesh (sp?) with the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi > here by any chance? I believe that Maharishi is titular. (Someone please correct me if I am wrong.) Thus, Maharishi Rajneesh is a different person from Maharishi Mahesh, but they are both Maharishis. Russell
0alt.atheism
Hello, My parents are selling a 1978 22 foot Searay. it is in excellent condition and runs great. It has a mercruiser 198 inboard/outboard engine (it is actually a chevy 305). It is from the weekender class so it has a hard top over the driver. has: Table Stove Water Tank Sink Sleeping for 6 much more it is a good all around or fishing boat. If interested or for more info write tojmparkin@mtu.edu or call (313)681-4609 Thanks, Jeremy -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Jeremy Parkinson aka SLIMY | "I'd give my right arm to be ambitexterous." | jmparkin@mtu.edu | UNKNOWN
6misc.forsale
Since the losers that sold me the hard disk for my computer are so generous, I need the info to set this drive from master to slave. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Please reply via e-mail. Incidentally, avoid purchasing a computer from ACS in Endicott, NY. Jeff **************************************************************** * Four out of five electrons prefer holes for their mutual * * annhiliation needs. Boycott Sierra. Ignore anybody who * * purports to be a serious Windows user. Support new makers * * of hardware and software. Buy Canadian music. Quit smoking. * * Take up running. FM synthesis is the CGA of audio. * * JKS4675@RITVAX.ISC.RIT.EDU * ****************************************************************
3comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
In article <1pohuq$4sq@grouper.mkt.csd.harris.com>, wdh@grouper.mkt.csd.harris.com (W. David Higgins) writes: |> I believe the only thing that needs correction, Mr. Vanderbyl, is your |> attitude. Nope, Mr. Myers has found the bad mistake and posted a correction, thank God. |> Acting the child won't gain you any favors or make a Who's acting? |> positive impression with anybody. Ghod knows you've make an impression |> on me; just not a positive one. Oh no, I haven't impressed Mr. Higgins.
12sci.electronics
joakimr@ifi.uio.no (Joakim Ruud) writes: > > Recently, I've asked myself a rather interesting question: What RIGHT does > god have on our lives (always assuming there is a god, of course...!) ?? > > In his infinite wisdom, he made it perfectly clear that if we don't live > according to his rules, we will burn in hell. Well, with what RIGHT can god > make that desicion? Let's say, for the sake of argument, that god creates every > one of us (directly or indirectly, it doesn't matter.). What then happens, is > that he first creates us, and then turns us lose. Well, I didn't ask to be > created. > > Let's make an analogue. If a scientist creates a unique living creature (which > has happened, it was even patented...!!!), does he then have the right to > expect it to behave in a certain matter, or die...? > > Who is god to impose its rules on us ? Who can tell if god is REALLY so > righteous as god likes us to believe? Are all christians a flock of sheep, > unable to do otherwise that follow the rest? > > Hmmmmmmmmmmmm. > > I just want to point out that this is not sarcasm, I mean it. > > How should one deal with a man who is convinced that > he is acting according to God's will, and who there- > Jokke fore believes that he is doing you a favour by > stabbing you in the back? > > -Voltaire >
19talk.religion.misc
In article <1993Apr21.204036.13723@rick.dgbt.doc.ca> (Jerry Han) writes: > GUESS WHAT PEOPLE? You live in one of the few countries in the world > where a person can complain without getting shot at. Only guessing, but from his address I'd say that Jerry, like me, lives in Canada. Unlike me, he thinks that our friends in the US enjoy the same freedom that we do, and he has not seen the slow but steady erosion to the south of us. We have the benefit of relatively slow politicians and ineffective law enforcement. Our rednecks tend to be the objects of derision rather than elected officials. It's everything LE can do to keep up with the real criminals. Any time they actually go after somebody just because they don't like his or her attitude, it's national news (It also often blows up in their faces: eg. the well-intentioned but flawed Zundel case, which resulted in a scolding from the Supreme Court, not only to LE for prosecuting the case but to Parliament for passing the law it was prosecuted under). Our friends south of the border don't have as easy a time of it. Among other things they have as many LE agencies as we have agencies, and some of them have teeth. They also have the War on Drugs which gives law-enforcement agencies exceptional powers to ignore individuals' rights (the DEA has more arbitrary power than that given to Canadian agencies under the War Measures Act). We have the RCMP and CSIS who can't stop fighting each other long enough to do any really effective suppression of private citizens' rights. Not only that, our Police Commissions have teeth, as I learned when I had to fend off a bent cop. It may be ironic that the nation founded on Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness is getting government-imposed order, while the nation founded on Peace, Order and Good Government is getting in-your-face liberty. That's not to say our time won't come. It looks like Chretien is going to run on a law-and-order platform. Be afraid. Cheers, Marc --- Marc Thibault | marc@tanda.isis.org Automation Architect | CIS:71441,2226 R.R.1, Oxford Mills, Ontario, Canada | NC FreeNet: aa185 -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- mQBNAiqxYTkAAAECALfeHYp0yC80s1ScFvJSpj5eSCAO+hihtneFrrn+vuEcSavh AAUwpIUGyV2N8n+lFTPnnLc42Ms+c8PJUPYKVI8ABRG0I01hcmMgVGhpYmF1bHQg PG1hcmNAdGFuZGEuaXNpcy5vcmc+ =HLnv -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
11sci.crypt
In the past, I have used named pipes to communicate between processes using the XtAddInput function to set up the event handling in Motif. Does anybody know of a way to do this with message passing ( IPC ) ? I tried it here and no luck so far. Thanks
5comp.windows.x
Yesterday, a friend of mine got a new driver for his card that more than doubled the speed... Naturally, besides being a tad jealous (same machine -- different cards), it got me thinking... What if I am using a slow driver? Wouldn't that be _horrible_ ? :) So netlanders, I need samples of your collective experience (sic) -- Do you proud owners of a Trident 8900C video card w/ 1MB VRAM have tried out more than one driver fro MS Win 3.1 which? which is the fastest? Not to be selfish, and to give you a motive for responding, I promise I am going to collect all the answers, and the actual drivers (provided u give me a site to get it from or uuencode&mail) get the WinMarks using PC Magazine`s WinBENCH and... post the results here... I am interested in SVGA drivers only (plain VGA users should run the Win driver, or this is what I 've heard -- dont flame me!) Particularly 800x600x16 and/or 800x600x256 (that should cover the majority of SVGA users) Well, what are you waiting for? hit that r or f or whatever... All input welcome -- so are money and Sun SPARCstations... Thanx in advance... -- Costas Malamas ____________________________________________________________ Georgia Institute of Technology OIT UA -- OIT doesn't pay me enough to share their opinions... Internet: ccastco@prism.gatech.edu
2comp.os.ms-windows.misc
arf@genesis.MCS.COM (Jack Schmidling) writes: >In article <1pprtvINNctl@aludra.usc.edu> sgoldste@aludra.usc.edu (Fogbound Child) writes: >>arf@genesis.MCS.COM (Jack Schmidling) writes: >> >>>In article <1993Apr1.164804.1105@Rapnet.Sanders.Lockheed.Com> babb@k2 (Scott Babb) writes: >>>>Jack Schmidling (arf@genesis.MCS.COM) wrote: >>>>: jac2y@Virginia.EDU (Jonathan A. Cook <jac2y>) writes: >>>>: : >> >>[...] >> >>>>Why do you restrict your condemnation of racial strife to Israel? >>>>Do the situations in Bosnia, Tibet, China, etc. not merit your comment? >> >>>As far as I am aware, we have not sent close to $100 billion dollars to >> ^^^ >> Let's not exaggerate. >I notice you did not offer an alternative number. Try this one on for >size..... by the year 2000, American taxpayers will have given Israel >one dollar for every star in the Milky Way Galaxy. >I will let you look up the number. OK, I admit I have no hard data on this. Why don't you help me with this? If you would compile a commented list of all grants, un-repaid loans (if any), and direct aid, I'd be very interested to see it. If you could give me references from, for example, Congressional Budget Authorization Hearings, I could look them up here and I'd be happy to post a verification of your data. Otherwise, I'll try my hand at this, but unfortunately I won't have sufficient time available until the end of this month, so the results would be delayed. Let me know if you're interested in doing this. ___Samuel___ Mossad Special Agent ID314159 Media Spiking and Mind Control Division Los Angeles Offices -- _________Pratice Safe .Signature! Prevent Dangerous Signature Virii!_______ Guildenstern: Our names shouted in a certain dawn ... a message ... a summons ... There must have been a moment, at the beginning, where we could have said -- no. But somehow we missed it.
18talk.politics.misc
After hearing endless debate (READ: name-calling) over which os is better, dos and windows or OS/2 and finally having enought resourses to play with a couple of different operating systems, I have decided to put the two products to a head to head test, as so many fellow newsposters have suggested. I have, however, no desire whatsoever to use a version of os/2 which wont REALLY do what it says (i.e. run windows apps) OS/2 2.0-2.1 will not run windows apps in 386 enhansed mode, something that most larger windows apps require, but OS/2 2.2, which is supposed to be in beta test, is supposed to. I have heard that os/2 2.2 beta is available via ftp, and I was wondering if anyone knew where to obtain a copy. I would appreciate any information, as I would like, once and for all, to establish for myself which is the best os for my needs. ->Robbie<- z_shererrg.sfasu.edu
2comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Hi: Does anybody known how much about to buy an ethernet card for mac se ? Besides,Where do I goto buy.If I buy it by mail-order,which brand is suitable for mac se(the network is coxial wire).Thanks a lot. Could anybody tell me what to do? Thank you.
4comp.sys.mac.hardware
amanda@intercon.com (Amanda Walker) writes: >> The answer seems obvious to me, they wouldn't. There is other hardware >> out there not compromised. DES as an example (triple DES as a better >> one.) > >So, where can I buy a DES-encrypted cellular phone? How much does it cost? >Personally, Cylink stuff is out of my budget for personal use :)... If the Clipper chip can do cheap crypto for the masses, obviously one could do the same thing WITHOUT building in back doors. Indeed, even without special engineering, you can construct a good system right now. A standard codec chip, a chip to do vocoding, a DES chip, a V32bis integrated modem module, and a small processor to do glue work, are all you need to have a secure phone. You can dump one or more of the above if you have a fast processor. With integration, you could put all of them onto a single chip -- and in the future they can be. Yes, cheap crypto is good -- but we don't need it from the government. You can do everything the clipper chip can do without needing it to be compromised. When the White House releases stuff saying "this is good because it gives people privacy", note that we didn't need them to give us privacy, the capability is available using commercial hardware right now. Indeed, were it not for the government doing everything possible to stop them, Qualcomm would have designed strong encryption right in to the CDMA cellular phone system they are pioneering. Were it not for the NSA and company, cheap encryption systems would be everywhere. As it is, they try every trick in the book to stop it. Had it not been for them, I'm sure cheap secure phones would be out right now. They aren't the ones making cheap crypto available. They are the ones keeping cheap crypto out of people's hands. When they hand you a clipper chip, what you are getting is a mess of pottage -- your prize for having traded in your birthright. And what did we buy with our birthright? Did we get safety from foreigners? No. They can read conference papers as well as anyone else and are using strong cryptography. Did we get safety from professional terrorists? I suspect that they can get cryptosystems themselves on the open market that work just fine -- most of them can't be idiots like the guys that bombed the trade center. Are we getting cheaper crypto for ourselves? No, because the market would have provided that on its own had they not deliberately sabotaged it. Someone please tell me what exactly we get in our social contract in exchange for giving up our right to strong cryptography? -- Perry Metzger pmetzger@shearson.com -- Laissez faire, laissez passer. Le monde va de lui meme.
11sci.crypt
Clipper might be a good way to cover the use of another layer of encryption. Currently, when you send an encrypted message, an opponent can usually tell 1) that you are using encryption 2) which encryption method you are using [because that information is usually in the clear]. With clipper, most opponents will only know that you are sending clipper-text, they won't know that your clipper-text is itself encoded. Only those few opponents who get your clipper-keys will know that your message is double encrypted. ... kind of like a safety deposit box containing a lock box. So, don't just think of replacements for clipper, also think of front ends. - Carl -- Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me. =kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
11sci.crypt
rj3s@Virginia.EDU writes in: Message-ID: <1993Apr26.202714.4519@Virginia.EDU> Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 20:27:14 GMT First, the following two quite normal phrases: > Why did not anyone venture to answer Andi's question in an intelligent > and unoffending manner? ^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^ > Now will we please start having some INTELLIGENT conversation? ^^^^^^^^^^^ and then he shows us what HE means by "intelligent and unoffending manner" and "INTELLIGENT conversation": > I have never seen such immaturity among semitophiles. ^^^^^^^^^^^^ [...deleted lines...] > The only ones guilty here of not backing up there viewpoints > with fact are the Israelophiles. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ [...deleted lines...] > You all are an insult to you race! {assuming you are also semitic} ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ [...deleted lines...] Later he reveals the truth: > ... I mention this not because I'm anti semitic [I'm part Jewish] ..... ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ [...deleted lines...] Shurely he IS an anti-Semite (call it anti-Jew), maybe BECAUSE he is "part Jewish" (e.g. his mother might have *dated* a Jew who didn't marry her, and so she got a little bastard whom she taught hatred). He is also a coward since he doesn't dare to sign with his name. At the end he signs with a highly intelligent and intellectual phrase: > Pissed off at Immature, > Closeminded, Self righteous > Semites rj3s@Virginia.EDU writes in: Message-ID: <1993Apr26.203425.4824@Virginia.EDU> Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 20:34:25 GMT > You know ed ,... You're right! Andi shouldn't be comparing > Israel to the Nazis. The Israelis are much worse than the > Nazis ever were anyway. The Nazis did a lot of good for > Germany, and they would have succeeded if it weren't for the > damn Jews. The Holocaust never happened anyway. Ample > evidence given by George Schafer at Harvard, Dept. of History, > and even by Randolph Higgins at NYU, have shown that the > Holocaust was just a semitic conspiracy created to obtain > sympathy to piush for the creation of Israel. The Nazis might also have sent this bastard to the gas chambers because of his "part Jewish"ness (only that he is not aware of it). PS: I wonder what kind of educational institution is @virginia.edu. Could it be the "Free KKK-University of Virginia" ? ;-) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Manfredo Tichauer M. EMAIL : tichauer@valpso.hanse.de Opitzstrasse 14 VOICE : (++ 49 40) 27.42.27 2000 Hamburg 60 - GERMANY FAX : (++ 49 40) 270.53.09 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
17talk.politics.mideast
In article <1993Apr17.202011.21443@spdcc.com> dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer) writes: >In article <1993Apr17.184435.19725@cunews.carleton.ca> wcsbeau@alfred.carleton.ca (OPIRG) writes: > >There has been NO hard info provided about MSG making people ill. >That's the point, after all. Why don't you just look it up in the Merk? Or check out the medical dictionary cite which a doctor mentioned earlier in this thread? > >That's because these "peer-reviewed" studies are not addressing >the effects of MSG in people, they're looking at animal models. >You can't walk away from this and start ranting about gloom and >doom as if there were any documented deleterious health effects >demonstrated in humans. Note that I wouldn't have any argument >with a statement like "noting that animal administration has pro- >duced the following [blah, blah], we must be careful about its >use in humans." This is precisely NOT what you said. Among others, see Olney's "Excitotoxic Food Aditives - Relevance of Animal Studies to Human Safety" (1982) Neurobehav. Toxicol. Teratol. vol 6: 455-462. I'm sure PETA would love to hear your arguments. >>Tests have been done on Rhesus monkeys, as well. I have never seen a >>study where the mode of administration was intra-ventricular. The Glu >>and Asp were administered orally. Some studies used IV and SC. >>Intra-ventricular is not a normal admin. method for food tox. studies, >>for obvious reasons. You must not have read the peer-reviewed works >>that I referred to or you would never have come up with this brain >>injection bunk. > >It most certainly is for neurotoxicology. You know, studies of >glutamate involve more than "food science". Whose talking about "food science"? What is this comment supposed to mean? *Neurotoxicology and Tratology*, *Brain Research*, *Nature*, *Progress in Brain Research*: all fine food science journals. ;-) >>Pardon me, but where are you getting this from? Have you read the >>journals? Have you done a thorough literature search? > >So, point us to the studies in humans, please. I'm familiar with >the literature, and I've never seen any which relate at all to >Olney's work in animals and the effects of glutamate on neurons. Then you would know that Olney himself has casually referred to "Chinese Restaurant Syndrome" in a few articles. Why don't *you* point us to some studies? Maybe then this exchange could be productive. >>The point is exceeding the window. Of course, they're amino acids. >>Note that people with PKU cannot tolerate any phenylalanine. > >Well, actually, they HAVE to tolerate some phenylalanine; it's a >essential amino acid. They just try to get as little as is healthy >without producing dangerous levels of phenylalanine and its metabolites >in the blood. They're unable to metabolise it. >>Olney's research compared infant human diets. Specifically, the amount >>of freely available Glu in mother's milk versus commercial baby foods, >>vs. typical lunch items from the Standard American Diet such as packaged >>soup mixes. He found that one could exceed the projected safety margin >>for infant humans by at least four-fold in a single meal of processed >>foods. Mother's milk was well below the effective dose. > >Goodness, I'm not saying that it's good to feed infants a lot of >glutamate-supplemented foods. It's just that this "projected safety >margin" is a construct derived from animal models and given that, >you can "prove" anything you like. We're talking prudent policy in >infant nutrition here, yet you're misrepresenting it as received wisdom. Who said anything about 'received wisdom'? There is no question that orally administered doses of MSG are capable of destroying nearly all neurons in the arcuate nucleus of the hypothalamus and the median eminence. These areas are responsible for the production of hormones critical to normal neuroendocrine function and the normal development of the vertabrate organism. Humans are vertebrates. Now what, pray tell, do you think will happen when the area of the brain necessary for the normal rhythm of gonadotropin release is missing? Are you trying to say that humans have no need of their pituitary, ANH, and ME, of that part of the brain that is responsible for controlling the realease (albeit indirectly) of estradiol and testosterone? How do you expect anyone to do the studies on this? It's unethical to "sacrifice" humans to check out what effects chronic, acute, etc doses of these compounds are having on the brain tissue in humans. The food industry knows this. That's why the animal model is used in medicine and psych. If you're talking about straight sensitivity, it would be useful to define the term. There are plenty of studies on psychoneuroimmunology showing the link between attitude and physiology. I suspect we may be arguing about separate things; *only* adult sensitivities (You), and late-occuring sequelae of childhood ingestion and its implication for adults (me). Certainly the doses for excitotoxicity in adults are considerably larger than for the young, but the additivity of Glu and Asp, and their copious and increased presence in modern processed foods (jointly), and their hidden presence in HVP, necessitates extreme caution. Why would anyone want to eat compounds which have been shown to markedly perturb the endocrine system in adults? The main point is *blood levels* attained, and oral doses would likely have to be greater than SC. >>Between who? Over what? I would be most interested in seeing you >>provide peer-reviewed non-food-industry-funded citations to articles >>disputing that MSG has no effects whatsoever. > >You mean "asserting". You're being intellectually dishonest (or just >plain confused), because you're conflating reports which do not necessarily >have anything to do with each other. Olney's reports would argue a potential >for problems in human infants, but that's not to say that this says anything >whatsoever about the use of MSG in most foods, nor does he provide any >studies in humans which indicate any deleterious effects (for obvious >reasons.) It says nothing about MSG's contribtion to the phenomenon >of the "Chinese Restaurant Syndrome". It says nothing about the frequent >inability to replicate anecdotal reports of MSG sensitivity in the lab. Olney's work provides a putative causal mechanism for some sensitivities. Terry, Epelbaum and Martin have shown that orally administered MSG causes changes in normal gonadotropic hormone fluctutations in adults. Glu also was found to induce immediate and persistant supression of rhythmic GH secretion, and to induce rapid and transient release of prolactin in adults chronically exposed to MSG. GH is responsible not only for control of growth during development, but also converts glycogen into glucose. Could this be the cause of headaches? I don't know. >>>dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com >>Hmm. ".com". Why am I not surprised? >>- Dianne Murray wcsbeau@ccs.carleton.ca > >Probably one of the dumber remarks you've made. If you had read Olney's review article, especially the remarks I already quoted in an earlier post, you would know to what I was alluding. May I ask exactly for whom you do computer consulting? :-)
13sci.med
In article <1993Apr15.170226.11074@cci632.cci.com>, dwk@cci632.cci.com (Dave Kehrer) wrote: > > Well, since you mentioned it... > > In article <1993Apr12.142028.6300@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>, migod@turing.toronto.edu (Mike Godfrey) writes: > > > Lemieux is clearly the MVP > > No question here. Chip in the Masterson as well... Lemieux for the Masterson? No doubt he had an awe inspiring season, but what personal records did he set this year? Lemieux should have Hart locked up...but how about Mike Gartner for the Masterson?
10rec.sport.hockey
Compiled from the last five Defensive Average reports, here are the career DAs for the individual players in the reports. Stats are courtesy of Sherri Nichols. Players are listed in descending order. Third Basemen ------------- Name 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 88-92 Mitchell, Kevin .690 ---- ---- ---- ---- 0.690 Gonzales, Rene .685 ---- ---- ---- ---- 0.685 Leius, Scott ---- ---- ---- .653 .680 0.672 Pendleton, Terry .692 .685 .631 .689 .634 0.667 Ventura, Robin ---- ---- .641 .647 .677 0.657 Wallach, Tim .728 .674 .600 .630 .665 0.657 Gruber, Kelly .717 .657 .580 .630 .664 0.650 Pagliarulo, Mike .631 ---- .575 .744 ---- 0.649 Harris, Lance ---- ---- .642 .652 ---- 0.648 Howell, Jack .656 .666 .609 ---- ---- 0.647 Williams, Matt ---- ---- .633 .653 .656 0.647 Caminiti, Ken ---- .675 .630 .653 .596 0.642 Sabo, Chris .751 .626 .616 .613 .575 0.642 Gaetti, Gary .616 .638 .655 .632 ---- 0.637 Buechele, Steve .647 .616 .647 .681 .599 0.635 Salazar, Luis ---- .617 .643 .637 ---- 0.632 Pecota, Bill ---- ---- ---- .629 ---- 0.629 Schmidt, Mike .628 ---- ---- ---- ---- 0.628 Riles, Ernie ---- .627 ---- ---- ---- 0.627 Boggs, Wade .643 .659 .550 .653 .634 0.626 Martinez, Egdar ---- ---- .621 .645 .599 0.624 Molitor, Paul .633 .617 ---- ---- ---- 0.624 Phillips, Tony ---- ---- .623 ---- ---- 0.623 *NL Average* .643 .625 .602 .623 .603 0.619 Brookens, Tom .616 ---- ---- ---- ---- 0.616 King, Jeff ---- ---- .616 ---- ---- 0.616 Seitzer, Kevin .654 .583 .593 ---- .635 0.616 *AL Average* .641 .612 .604 .620 .602 0.615 Jacoby, Brook .624 .621 .600 ---- .597 0.613 Hansen, Dave ---- ---- ---- ---- .611 0.611 Law, Vance .635 .576 ---- ---- ---- 0.611 Magadan, Dave ---- ---- ---- ---- .609 0.609 Jefferies, Greg ---- ---- ---- ---- .606 0.606 Sharperson, Mike ---- ---- .606 ---- ---- 0.606 Zeile, Todd ---- ---- ---- .614 .593 0.605 Baerga, Carlos ---- ---- ---- .604 ---- 0.604 Hayes, Chris ---- .601 .622 .606 .574 0.602 Livingstone, Scott ---- ---- ---- ---- .597 0.597 Hamilton, J. .611 .584 ---- ---- ---- 0.595 Kelly, Pat ---- ---- ---- .595 ---- 0.595 Lyons, Steve .590 ---- ---- ---- ---- 0.590 Oberkfell, Ken .590 ---- ---- ---- ---- 0.590 Johnson, Howard .628 .549 .611 .573 ---- 0.588 Bell, Buddy .587 ---- ---- ---- ---- 0.587 Lansford, Carney .620 .578 .594 ---- .550 0.587 Presley, Jim .643 .595 .530 ---- ---- 0.584 Schu, Rick ---- .584 ---- ---- ---- 0.584 Worthington, Cal ---- .583 .575 ---- ---- 0.580 Hollins, Dave ---- ---- ---- ---- .577 0.577 Sheffield, Gary ---- ---- .584 ---- .567 0.575 Blauser, Jeff ---- .573 ---- ---- ---- 0.573 Fryman, Travis ---- ---- ---- .571 ---- 0.571 Gantner, Jim ---- ---- ---- .570 ---- 0.570 Gomez, Lee ---- ---- ---- .551 .542 0.546 Palmer, Dean ---- ---- ---- ---- .520 0.520 -- Dale J. Stephenson |*| (steph@cs.uiuc.edu) |*| Grad Student At Large "It is considered good to look wise, especially when not overburdened with information" -- J. Golden Kimball
9rec.sport.baseball
1-800-832-4778 Western Digital's Voice Mail - Can get information on many drives, or an actual person at the end.
3comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Hi, I've got a Multi I/O card (IDE controller + serial/parallel interface) and two floppy drives (5 1/4, 3 1/2) and a Quantum ProDrive 80AT connected to it. I was able to format the hard disk, but I could not boot from it. I can boot from drive A: (which disk drive does not matter) but if I remove the disk from drive A and press the reset switch, the LED of drive A: continues to glow, and the hard disk is not accessed at all. I guess this must be a problem of either the Multi I/o card or floppy disk drive settings (jumper configuration?) Does someone have any hint what could be the reason for it. Please reply by email to GERTHD@MVS.SAS.COM Thanks, Thomas +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Thomas Dachsel | | Internet: GERTHD@MVS.SAS.COM | | Fidonet: Thomas_Dachsel@camel.fido.de (2:247/40) | | Subnet: dachsel@rnivh.rni.sub.org (UUCP in Germany, now active) | | Phone: +49 6221 4150 (work), +49 6203 12274 (home) | | Fax: +49 6221 415101 | | Snail: SAS Institute GmbH, P.O.Box 105307, D-W-6900 Heidelberg | | Tagline: One bad sector can ruin a whole day... | +-------------------------------------------------------------------+
3comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
In article <1993Apr4.135829.28141@pro-haven.cts.com>, shadow@pro-haven.cts.com writes: > In <1993Apr3.094509.11448@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> > asphaug@lpl.arizona.edu (Erik Asphaug x2773) writes: > % By the way, the short-lived Zephyr is essentially a GpZ 550, > Why was the "Zephyr" discontinued? I heard something about a problem with > the name, but I never did hear anything certain... I don't think the 550 sold very well - most North Americans who ride a standard rather than a sport bike usually want something bigger. People walk into the dealership, look at the 550 and the 750 and say, "I might as well spring the extra bucks for the bigger engine." -- Bruce Clarke B.C. Environment e-mail: bclarke@galaxy.gov.bc.ca
8rec.motorcycles
Hello Folks, I'm very happy with my "new" R80GS. My range is 238 miles on 4.8 gallons... that's 50 mpg!! Surprisingly, the bike is a real cruiser. I was expecting something rough. She's a sweet backroad honey. And I can go pretty much anyplace I'd take my mountain bike. As far as shaft effect, it's more a torque effect from the crankshaft in my opinion. Rev it sitting still (when the driveshaft is not moving) and the bike twists a bit. Maybe I don't ride her fast enough to get a shaft effect, but in my opinion a little buffeting by wind is of far greater consequence. Okay, here are my questions: 1) Any recommendations for a home-made fairing? I'd like to keep the wind off my chest, and perhaps my helmet, for comfort at highway speeds (70 mph), yet don't want to (a) screw up the stability or (b) block my vision too much for trail riding. Anybody have luck with two-piece detachible fairings? I'd like to make it myself out of plexiglas. 2) I run two lights, the standard headlamp plus a sidelamp mounted on the crash bar. The illumination's excellent that way, with a full beam coming out from the level of the motor (left side); the lamp beam is linear so that you get a bright streak of illumination from left to right, and it really picks up the periphery (deer lurking, etc.) Combined with the headlamp on high you can see like day. But I've heard that BMW alternators don't crank out too much. Do I need to shut down the sidelamp when I'm puttering around in the dirt at low RPM? 3) This is embarassing: I'm having trouble starting the bike first thing in the morning. I invariably flood the carbs, then go in and read a section of the paper, and then she starts right up. Is this a Zen thing? 4) The Hayne's manual says do not under any circumstances use gasoline with alcohol additives... Yeah, right. What do you folks due to keep the engine and carbs from being eaten by ethanol and methanol? Any particular brands of gas that are best? Additives? Thanks, /-----b-o-d-y---i-s---t-h-e---b-i-k-e----------------------------\ | | | DoD# 88888 asphaug@hindmost.lpl.arizona.edu | | '90 Kawi 550 Zephyr (Erik Asphaug) | | '86 BMW R80GS | \-----------------------s-o-u-l---i-s---t-h-e---r-i-d-e-r--------/
8rec.motorcycles
Can anyone help with this? System: SPARC Classic, Solaris 2.1, gcc 2.3.3, X11R5 When I try to build the XView libraries (xview3, patched with the patch from the X11R5-Solaris kit), I get the following error: rm -f ndet_loop.o shared/ndet_loop.o gcc -fpcc-struct-return -E -O2 -I../../.././build/include -I/usr/X11R5/include -DSVR4 -DSYSV -DFUNCPROTO=15 -DOS_HAS_LOCALE -DOS_HAS_MMAP ndet_loop.c \ | xstr -l _libxview_xstr -c - gcc -fpcc-struct-return -fPIC -O2 -I../../.././build/include -I/usr/X11R5/include -DSVR4 -DSYSV -DFUNCPROTO=15 -DOS_HAS_LOCALE -DOS_HAS_MMAP -c x.c \ -o shared/ndet_loop.o In file included from ../../.././build/include/xview/notify.h:29, from ../../.././build/include/xview_private/ntfy.h:24, from x.c:18: /usr/include/sys/ucontext.h:25: parse error before `sigset_t' /usr/include/sys/ucontext.h:25: warning: no semicolon at end of struct or union /usr/include/sys/ucontext.h:26: warning: data definition has no type or storage class /usr/include/sys/ucontext.h:29: parse error before `}' /usr/include/sys/ucontext.h:29: warning: data definition has no type or storage class In file included from ../../.././build/include/xview_private/ntfy.h:24, from x.c:18: ./../.././build/include/xview/notify.h:286: parse error before `*' ./../.././build/include/xview/notify.h:286: warning: data definition has no type or storage class In file included from x.c:35: /usr/include/sys/user.h:226: `MAXSIG' undeclared, outside of functions ndet_loop.c:71: `NSIG' undeclared, outside of functions ndet_loop.c:85: variable `ndet_sigvec' has initializer but incomplete type ndet_loop.c:88: parse error before `*' ndet_loop.c:88: warning: data definition has no type or storage class ndet_loop.c: In function `ndet_fig_sig_change': ndet_loop.c:687: `NSIG' undeclared (first use this function) ndet_loop.c:687: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once ndet_loop.c:687: for each function it appears in.) ndet_loop.c: In function `ndet_signal_catcher': ndet_loop.c:751: parse error before `ucontext_t' ndet_loop.c:764: `sigset_t' undeclared (first use this function) ndet_loop.c:764: parse error before `newmask' ndet_loop.c:766: `newmask' undeclared (first use this function) ndet_loop.c:769: `oldmask' undeclared (first use this function) ndet_loop.c:777: parse error before `)' ndet_loop.c:795: warning: assignment makes pointer from integer without a cast ndet_loop.c:798: parse error before `)' ndet_loop.c: In function `ndet_send_delayed_sigs': ndet_loop.c:825: `sigset_t' undeclared (first use this function) ndet_loop.c:825: parse error before `newmask' ndet_loop.c:837: `newmask' undeclared (first use this function) ndet_loop.c:839: `oldmask' undeclared (first use this function) ndet_loop.c:848: parse error before `)' ndet_loop.c: At top level: ndet_loop.c:1022: parse error before `*' ndet_loop.c:85: storage size of `ndet_sigvec' isn't known *** Error code 1 make: Fatal error: Command failed for target `ndet_loop.o' rm -f ndet_loop.o shared/ndet_loop.o gcc -fpcc-struct-return -E -O2 -I../../.././build/include -I/usr/X11R5/include -DSVR4 -DSYSV -DFUNCPROTO=15 -DOS_HAS_LOCALE -DOS_HAS_MMAP ndet_loop.c \ | xstr -l _libxview_xstr -c - gcc -fpcc-struct-return -fPIC -O2 -I../../.././build/include -I/usr/X11R5/include -DSVR4 -DSYSV -DFUNCPROTO=15 -DOS_HAS_LOCALE -DOS_HAS_MMAP -c x.c \ -o shared/ndet_loop.o In file included from ../../.././build/include/xview/notify.h:29, from ../../.././build/include/xview_private/ntfy.h:24, from x.c:18: /usr/include/sys/ucontext.h:25: parse error before `sigset_t' /usr/include/sys/ucontext.h:25: warning: no semicolon at end of struct or union /usr/include/sys/ucontext.h:26: warning: data definition has no type or storage class /usr/include/sys/ucontext.h:29: parse error before `}' /usr/include/sys/ucontext.h:29: warning: data definition has no type or storage class In file included from ../../.././build/include/xview_private/ntfy.h:24, from x.c:18: ./../.././build/include/xview/notify.h:286: parse error before `*' ./../.././build/include/xview/notify.h:286: warning: data definition has no type or storage class In file included from x.c:35: /usr/include/sys/user.h:226: `MAXSIG' undeclared, outside of functions ndet_loop.c:71: `NSIG' undeclared, outside of functions ndet_loop.c:85: variable `ndet_sigvec' has initializer but incomplete type ndet_loop.c:88: parse error before `*' ndet_loop.c:88: warning: data definition has no type or storage class ndet_loop.c: In function `ndet_fig_sig_change': ndet_loop.c:687: `NSIG' undeclared (first use this function) ndet_loop.c:687: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once ndet_loop.c:687: for each function it appears in.) ndet_loop.c: In function `ndet_signal_catcher': ndet_loop.c:751: parse error before `ucontext_t' ndet_loop.c:764: `sigset_t' undeclared (first use this function) ndet_loop.c:764: parse error before `newmask' ndet_loop.c:766: `newmask' undeclared (first use this function) ndet_loop.c:769: `oldmask' undeclared (first use this function) ndet_loop.c:777: parse error before `)' ndet_loop.c:795: warning: assignment makes pointer from integer without a cast ndet_loop.c:798: parse error before `)' ndet_loop.c: In function `ndet_send_delayed_sigs': ndet_loop.c:825: `sigset_t' undeclared (first use this function) ndet_loop.c:825: parse error before `newmask' ndet_loop.c:837: `newmask' undeclared (first use this function) ndet_loop.c:839: `oldmask' undeclared (first use this function) ndet_loop.c:848: parse error before `)' ndet_loop.c: At top level: ndet_loop.c:1022: parse error before `*' ndet_loop.c:85: storage size of `ndet_sigvec' isn't known *** Error code 1 make: Fatal error: Command failed for target `ndet_loop.o' Obviously, most of this is due to the problem encountered while including <sys/ucontext.h> - I've tried several approaches, but can't get past this point. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Mahalo nui o kakou, _______________________________________________________________________________ Henry Stilmack ) Computing Systems Manager ) Perform random kindnesses UK/Netherlands/Canada Joint Astronomy Centre ) and senseless acts of beauty 660 N. A'ohoku Place, Hilo, HI 96720 ) hps@jach.Hawaii.Edu 808-969-6530 ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5comp.windows.x
In article <3090@shaman.wv.tek.com> andrew@frip.wv.tek.com writes: >So is cocaine. What's your point? That neither is harmful when used carefully?
7rec.autos
In article <1993Apr23.152549.8169@starbase.trincoll.edu>, () writes: > In article <1r5rnn$rdt@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, bu008@cleveland.Freenet.Edu > > Perhaps you've been under a rock the last few days? The BATF and the FBI > > are both federal agencies. Clinton has admitted in front of news cameras > > that Janet Reno (the once and future Attorney General) gave him a full > > briefing of what was planned *before* they did it, and he gave her the > > go ahead. > > Maybe, just possibly, that makes him a *teensy* bit responsible? > Perhaps you've been under a rock since, say, the turn of the century. How > in the #$^& is one man supposed to review every single freaking > governmental action, every day? That's why we have an executive branch. HE > reviewed the plan and said "go," but he wasn't the architect and he wasn't > there, bullhorn in hand, implementing it. Yes, he was responsible in the > sense that he was briefed. So what! Shit happens. Hey, joe -- assuming you're old enough to remember it -- how did you feel about presidential responsibility every time Reagan said "I don't recall" about his arms-for-hostages meetings with the Ollie North gang? How did you feel about it when Bush said he "was out of the loop on that decision" when he was right there in the thick of it? Oh, right. "He was responsible in the sense that he was briefed, but so what -- shit happens!" Is that what you said? > joe.kusmierczak@mail.trincoll.edu -- cdt@rocket.sw.stratus.com --If you believe that I speak for my company, OR cdt@vos.stratus.com write today for my special Investors' Packet...
16talk.politics.guns
In article <1993Apr20.151753.13020@udel.edu>, carroll@hercules.cis.udel.edu (Mark C. Carroll) writes... >Wait a second, you're ignoring major facts here. >There was NO attempt to simply serve a warrant. The BATF had a >no-knock warrant. The initial firefight began when the BATF threw >concussion grenades at the building. (BATF admits this!) When did the BATF say this? Everything I've seen from the BATF, from the official version to the dissident statements of BATF officers who conducted the raid claims that the Davidians were shooting at the agents long before they were within grenade range. Also, if the warrant is sealed, how do we know it was a 'no-knock'? _____ _____ \\\\\\/ ___/___________________ Mitchell S Todd \\\\/ / _____/__________________________ ________________ \\/ / mst4298@zeus._____/.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'_'_'_/ \_____ \__ / / tamu.edu _____/.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'_'_/ \__________\__ / / _____/_'_'_'_'_'_'_'_'_'_'_'_'_'_'_/ \_ / /__________/ \/____/\\\\\\ \\\\\\ ------
18talk.politics.misc
Hi again! Okay, am getting an old AT type together as well. Anyone have a 16 bit MFM HDC they'd like to sell? WD is preferred, but Adaptec and DTK are fine too......for that matter, almost anything so long as it works! Lee (lee@tosspot.sv.com)
3comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Does anyone on this newsgroup happen to know WHY morphine was first isolated from opium? If you know why, or have an idea for where I could look to find this info, please mail me. CSH any suggestionas would be greatly appreciated -- "Kilimanjaro is a pretty tricky climb. Most of it's up, until you reach the very, very top, and then it tends to slope away rather sharply." Sir George Head, OBE (JC) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ LOGIC: "The point is frozen, the beast is dead, what is the difference?" Gavin Millarrrrrrrrrr (JC)
13sci.med
>klp@doe.carleton.ca (Ka Lun Pang) writes: > > Hi folks, > > I borrowed a VHS tape from a friend and it has a warning in the begining sayi > that attempts to copy the tape will result in destroying the copy and the > original. I found this unbelievable as playing and recording are two differen > processes. However, I've never seen this tape being sold anywhere so I don't > want to take the chance even it's small. Greetings. There are 3 types of warnings on (US) tapes: 1) A hologram is glued across the seam of the 2 halves of the tape. The message usually reads, "If seal is broken, you must buy this tape" 2) The standard "MacroVision" warning, "Copies of this tape will be unviewable" 3) [your case] Extended message for the Average Consumer (tm) which states that even attempting to copy the tape will destroy the original. I don't believe you can sue them for misinformation in cases like this :-) Take care. P.S. Of course, #3 is utter BS - but the Average Consumer (tm) believes it. Heck, my mom once returned such a tape without watching it... she was afraid that something might just happen :-) -- / Filip "I'll buy a vowel" Gieszczykiewicz. | Best e-mail "fmgst+@pitt.edu" \ | All ideas are mine but they can be yours for only $0.99 so respond NOW!!!! | | I live for my EE major, winsurfing, programming, SCA, and assorted dreams. | \ 200MB Drive - Linux has 100MB and MS-DOS has 100MB. MS-DOS is worried ;-) /
12sci.electronics
bart@splunge.uucp (Barton Oleksy) writes: >yadalle@cs.UAlberta.CA (Yadallee Dave S) writes: >>Here's one from the mill. The Oilers MIGHT move to Hamilton >>where Porklington can get a free deal. >>Given what Labour relations and Puck has been like, it WOULD be a sigh of >>relief. >>This WAY w4e can can BOTH elements!! >Well, Dave, I would have to disagree with you there. Satan himself could >own the team, and I'd be happy as long as the Oilers stayed in Edmonton. >Selfish, but true. I don't want to see the Oilers move, no matter who >their owner is. >Bart, bart@splunge.uucp or barto@nait.ab.ca I too am of the same sentiment Bart, but realistically, this town DOESN'T WANT TO pay for quality player and hence we are loosing these people left, right and center. Labour is also responsible for their boycott Pocklington movement. I would like the Oilers to stay, but realistically, given this situation, it's bye-bye Oilers. -- Dave Shariff Yadallee (B. Sc.(Econ/Math) (U of Alberta 1990) ) ( yadalle@amisk.cs.ualberta.ca) God Save the Queen, God Bless us All!Remember! Jesus saves lives from eternal damnation! Newfoundland, keep good old Clyde, VOTE LIBERAL!
10rec.sport.hockey
I am interested in finding a supplier for an array of leds on material which is transparent when nothing is lit. I'm not quite sure what LCD screens are like away from the laptop but I would guess they are not too clear. An ideal item would be an LED array for which each LED is about 1/2" square. (Yes very course) This is for distance viewing, but on a window. Any pointers of suggestions would be much appreciated. -Mark Battisti mbattist@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu 1940 Summit Street #B Columbus, Ohio 43201 (614) 299-0317
12sci.electronics