Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 8/7/84; site ucbvax.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!houxm!ihnp4!ucbvax!human-nets From: human-nets@ucbvax.ARPA Newsgroups: fa.human-nets Subject: HUMAN-NETS Digest V7 #54 Message-ID: <2319@ucbvax.ARPA> Date: Tue, 2-Oct-84 21:55:58 EDT Article-I.D.: ucbvax.2319 Posted: Tue Oct 2 21:55:58 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 4-Oct-84 01:13:15 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA Organization: University of California at Berkeley Lines: 282 From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator)HUMAN-NETS Digest Tuesday, 2 Oct 1984 Volume 7 : Issue 54 Today's Topics: Response to Query - E-mail for telephone messages? (2 msgs), Computers and People - Re: Lifeless Screen?, Computers and the Law - Unions muscling in? (6 msgs), Computer Security - Use of Excessive Force, Chess - Computer Chess Tournament ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue 2 Oct 84 04:58:05-EDT From: Michael Rubin Subject: Re: Anyone using electronic mail to distribute telephone Subject: messages? To: furuta@WASHINGTON.ARPA The receptionists here in the Columbia CS Dept. often distribute phone messages using vanilla MM on TOPS-20. Message recipients don't especially care about formatting, and the -20 is used for most departmental word processing and memos anyhow, so the secretaries know about MM and Emacs. The load is light because the front desk doesn't answer individual office phones when people are out. The department chairman has his own secretary and probably gets his messages on paper (he's a mathematician, not a hacker). Paper messages for other people aren't too practical because the front office is far away from most everything else, and people don't pass by it often. The ordinary mail program should be fine for all but the really busiest receptionists (the kind who spend 120% of their time answering the phone -- they must do it with pipelined architecture!) as long as it's always up on their terminal (or easy to invoke). A proper set of aliases and a good MM.INIT (or .mailrc) might help. This assumes the receptionist is reasonably familiar with the operating system.... But if you want something specialized for phone messages, it's easy to write your own mail program on Unix. It might use keywords or terminal function keys to distinguish the fields of the message, then arrange them in a standard order before feeding everything to sendmail. --Mike Rubin ------------------------------ Date: Tue 2 Oct 84 02:01:21-PDT From: Richard Furuta Subject: Re: Anyone using electronic mail to distribute telephone Subject: messages? To: RUBIN@COLUMBIA-20.ARPA I guess the problem here is that the receptionist fields phone calls and also fronts for the academic advisors and so has a bunch of students coming in at the same time. I tend to favor the keyword or function key approach to using vanilla MM because it allows one the flexibility to enter parts of the message in random order (including the intended recipient). Lots of places seem to be using vanilla MM, though. --Rick ------------------------------ Date: 2 October 1984 06:15-EDT From: Jerry E. Pournelle Subject: Luddite Theory To: US.JFA @ CU20B well, what is the effect of the flat lifeless printed page? Date: Wed 26 Sep 84 16:49:19-EDT From: Janet Asteroff To: HUMAN-NETS Re: Luddite Theory From the "No Comment" department: "What is the effect of the flat, two-dimensional, visual, and externally supplied image, and of the lifeless though florid colors of the viewing screen, on the development of the young child's own inner capacity to bring to birth living, mobile, creative images of his own? Indeed, what effect does viewing the computer screen have on the healthy development of the growing but unformed mind, brain, and body of the child?" -- Douglas Sloan Teachers College Record Summer, 1984 ------------------------------ Date: 2 October 1984 06:11-EDT From: Jerry E. Pournelle Subject: Government on the move: Home computer use To: Ellis @ YALE Cc: ZALESKI @ RUTGERS for intelligent people, labor union policy is to labor as bird shot is to birds. They do not know how to organize the electronic cottage; therefore, it must be banned. Date: Sat, 29 Sep 84 12:49:10 EDT From: John R Ellis To: HUMAN-NETS, Mike Re: Government on the move: Home computer use The claim is that these moves against home piece-work are part of a bigger plan to move in on/crack down on the computer business in which many people work at home. According to the most recent issue of National Review, the AFL-CIO considers "telecommuting" the same as "home work" in traditional manufacturing and wants to ban it. ------------------------------ Date: 2 October 1984 06:14-EDT From: Jerry E. Pournelle Subject: Governement on the move: Home computer use To: taber%kirk.DEC @ DECWRL obviously people who want to do productive work without government permission must be stopped. First forid them; then try court orders; then fine them; and if they do not pay fines, then do jail or shoot them. Workiing without permission indeed! ------------------------------ Date: 2 October 1984 06:39-EDT From: Jerry E. Pournelle Subject: Government on the move: Home computer use To: ZALESKI @ RUTGERS Cc: Carter @ RUTGERS, Poli-Sci @ RUTGERS it is already illegal under federal law to make ladies garments for sale if you work in your own home. ilgwu doesn't need to get a law; they only need to (1) keep the one they have and (2) get marshals to jail the women who use their home kniting machines to make ski caps, underwear, etc, if intended for women. If intende for men it's legal; women are EXPECTED to make clothing for men, apparently. ILGWU strikes again. Sing, sing the praises. ------------------------------ Date: Tue 2 Oct 84 06:52:13-PDT From: Mark Crispin Subject: 40 hour weeks Where in the computer industry do 40-hour-weeks exist? Certainly not in Silicon Valley, where the norm is 50-60 hours. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Oct 84 9:44:25 PDT From: hibbert.pa@XEROX.ARPA Subject: reply to PStJTT on Unions To: taber%kirk.DEC@DECWRL.ARPA (Patrick St.Joseph Teahan Taber) One aspect of unions that you neglected to mention is that they are no longer voluntary organizations. The government (NLRB) has done much to reinforce the power (economic and political) that unions wield. The problem isn't so much that unions aren't useful in the current economy as that they are using their power to exploit some of the people who are forced to pay dues to them in order to hold whatever job they've chosen. The extent to which the government is interfereing in the situation is illustrated to some extent by the effect the Reagan administration has had on the situation. Now that he has gotten his hooks into the NLRB, and some rulings have started going against the unions, they have started saying that maybe the NLRB has outlived its usefulness. Chris ------------------------------ Date: Tuesday, 2 Oct 1984 11:18:43-PDT From: minow%rex.DEC@decwrl.ARPA Subject: telecommuting may not be so good after all A recent collection of messages on Human Nets and the Unix USENET presented the case for telecommuting and against the ban against working at home (the Vermont knitters) proposed by the trade union movement. The issues are somewhat more complex than the "they just want to regulate us out of existance" messages I have been seeing. There are several disadvantages to working at home -- the work environment may not be as safe as in an office or factory (poor lighting and seating arrangements, for example). More importantly, when you work alone at home, you may lose some important aspects of work: Social status -- your peers don't see the value of your efforts. Sense of community -- you don't see the relevance of your work in a greater context. Also, you lose the socializing aspects of work: especially the "old-boy" network that many feel is important for advancement. Use and development of one's resources -- at-home jobs are likely to be repetitive dead-end work, such as data-entry (or knitting). Working at home will make it more difficult for you to locate a more challanging job. While it is certainly true that turning labor into a collection of cottage industries will erode union control and power, it would be unwise to ignore other aspects of the situation. Martin Minow decvax!minow @ berkeley.arpa ------------------------------ Date: Tuesday, 2 Oct 1984 12:23:25-PDT From: taber%kirk.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (Patrick St.Joseph Teahan Taber) To: hn%kirk.DEC@decwrl.ARPA Subject: Use of excessive force I was just reading in EE Times about a product that is supposed to stop software piracy by damaging the disk of people who use a pirated s/w product. The interesting part of the article is: "When detected, Prolok-plus warns the user to remove the illegally duplicated diskette. If the user continues to try to use the program, then Prolok-plus performs the retributive act of using a so-called programming "worm" to randomly destroy data until the system is shut down. This sort of data loss is particularly catastrophic for hard-disk users who store most of their information on one large disk." I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me that the pricipal of "use of excessive force" applies here. This is the same law that says a shop owner is in the wrong if he shoots someone who steals a candy bar. Given that you can't know who is using the pirated copy (a kid runs it on his parent's bookkeeping computer, for example) and you can't know what data you're destroying (lab results, data used to control a dangerous machine, etc) I don't think you can be justified in randomly destroying things. I give the idea an "A" for effort, but an "F" for common sense. I have great sympathy for anyone trying to stop pirates. (I make my living as a software engineer.) But I can't say I'll feel sorry for this outfit if they lose their shirts in court. >>>==>PStJTT ------------------------------ Date: Tue Oct 2 12:24:29 1984 From: mclure@sri-prism To: ailist@sri-ai, sf-lovers@rutgers, chess@sri-unix Subject: reminder of upcoming computer chess tournament in San Subject: Francisco This is a reminder that this coming Sunday (Oct 7) will herald the beginning of the battle of the titans at the San Francisco Hilton "continental parlors" room at 1pm. Cray Blitz the reigning world champion program will attempt to squash the vengeful Belle. Nuchess, a perennial "top-finishing contender" and descendent of Chess 4.5, wants a piece of the action and would be very happy to see the Belle/Cray Blitz battle cause both to go up in a puff of greasy, black smoke, leaving Nuchess as the top dog for the entire year. It promises to be as interesting as it is every year. You don't have to be a computer-freak or chess-fanatic to enjoy the event. Come on by for a rip-roaring time. Stuart ------------------------------ End of HUMAN-NETS Digest ************************