Computer underground Digest Sun Jan 15, 1995 Volume 7 : Issue 03 ISSN 1004-042X Editors: J

Master Index Current Directory Index Go to SkepticTank Go to Human Rights activist Keith Henson Go to Scientology cult

Skeptic Tank!

Computer underground Digest Sun Jan 15, 1995 Volume 7 : Issue 03 ISSN 1004-042X Editors: Jim Thomas and Gordon Meyer (TK0JUT2@NIU.BITNET) Archivist: Brendan Kehoe Retiring Shadow Archivist: Stanton McCandlish Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala Ian Dickinson Copy Reader: Laslo Toth CONTENTS, #7.03 (Sun, Jan 15, 1995) File 1--Open Letter to Wired Magazine (fwd) File 2--More Legal Analysis of Steve Jackson Games (Legal Bytes) File 3--The Stupid Net.Coverage News Awards -- 1994 and 1995 File 4--Alliance for Community Media -- Call for Workshops File 5--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 25 Nov 1994) CuD ADMINISTRATIVE, EDITORIAL, AND SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION APPEARS IN THE CONCLUDING FILE AT THE END OF EACH ISSUE. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 14 Jan 1995 20:08:38 -0600 (CST) From: David Smith Subject: File 1--Open Letter to Wired Magazine (fwd) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > (Chris Goggans) >Subject--Open Letter to Wired Magazine >Date--13 Jan 1995 00:51:09 GMT To Whom It May Concern: I am writing this under the assumption that the editorial staff at Wired will "forget" to print it in the upcoming issue, so I am also posting it on every relevant newsgroup and online discussion forum that I can think of. When I first read your piece "Gang War In Cyberspace" I nearly choked on my own stomach bile. The whole tone of this piece was so far removed from reality that I found myself questioning what color the sky must be in Wired's universe. Not that I've come to expect any better from Wired. Your magazine, which could have had the potential to actually do something, has become a parody...a politically correct art-school project that consistently falls short of telling the whole story or making a solid point. (Just another example of Kapor-Kash that ends up letting everyone down.) I did however expect more from Josh Quittner. I find it interesting that so much emphasis can be placed on an issue of supposed racial slurs as the focus of an imaginary "gang war," especially so many years after the fact. It's also interesting to me that people keep overlooking the fact that one of the first few members of our own little Legion of Doom was black (Paul Muad'dib.) Maybe if he had not died a few years back that wouldn't be so quickly forgotten. (Not that it makes a BIT of difference what color a hacker is as long as he or she has a brain and a modem, or these days at least a modem.) I also find it interesting that a magazine can so easily implicate someone as the originator of the so-called "fighting words" that allegedly sparked this online-battle, without even giving a second thought as to the damage that this may do to the person so named. One would think that a magazine would have more journalistic integrity than that (but then again, this IS Wired, and political correctness sells magazines and satisfies advertisers.) Thankfully, I'll only have to endure one moth of the "Gee Chris, did you know you were a racist redneck?" phone calls. It's further odd that someone characterized as so sensitive to insults allegedly uttered on a party-line could have kept the company he did. Strangely enough, Quittner left out all mention of the MOD member who called himself "SuperNigger." Surely, John Lee must have taken umbrage to an upper-middle class man of Hebrew descent so shamefully mocking him and his entire race, wouldn't he? Certainly he wouldn't associate in any way with someone like that...especially be in the same group with, hang out with, and work on hacking projects with, would he? Please, of course he would, and he did. (And perhaps he still does...) The whole "racial issue" was a NON-ISSUE. However, such things make exciting copy and garner many column inches so keep being rehashed. In fact, several years back when the issue first came up, the statement was cited as being either "Hang up, you nigger," or "Hey, SuperNigger," but no one was sure which was actually said. Funny how the wording changes to fit the slant of the "journalist" over time, isn't it? I wish I could say for certain which was actually spoken, but alas, I was not privy to such things. Despite the hobby I supposedly so enjoyed according to Quittner, "doing conference bridges," I abhorred the things. We used to refer to them as "Multi-Loser Youps" (multi-user loops) and called their denizens "Bridge Bunnies." The bridge referred to in the story was popularzed by the callers of the 5A BBS in Houston, Texas. (A bulletin board, that I never even got the chance to call, as I had recently been raided by the Secret Service and had no computer.) Many people from Texas did call the BBS, however, and subsequently used the bridge, but so did people from Florida, Arizona, Michigan, New York and Louisiana. And as numbers do in the underground, word of a new place to hang out caused it to propagate rapidly. To make any implications that such things were strictly a New York versus Texas issue is ludicrous, and again simply goes to show that a "journalist" was looking for more points to add to his (or her) particular angle. This is not to say that I did not have problems with any of the people who were in MOD. At the time I still harbored strong feelings towards Phiber Optik for the NYNEX-Infopath swindle, but that was about it. And that was YEARS ago. (Even I don't harbor a grudge that long.) Even the dozen or so annoying phone calls I receied in late 1990 and early 1991 did little to evoke "a declaration of war." Like many people, I know how to forward my calls, or unplug the phone. Amazing how technology works, isn't it? Those prank calls also had about as much to do with the formation of Comsec as bubble-gum had to do with the discovery of nuclear fission. (I'm sure if you really put some brain power to it, and consulted Robert Anton Wilson, you could find some relationships.) At the risk of sounding glib, we could have cared less about hackers at Comsec. If there were no hackers, or computer criminals, there would be no need for computer security consultants. Besides, hackers account for so little in the real picture of computer crime, that their existence is more annoyance than something to actually fear. However, when those same hackers crossed the line and began tapping our phone lines, we were more than glad to go after them. This is one of my only rules of action: do whatever you want to anyone else, but mess with me and my livelihood and I will devote every ounce of my being to paying you back. That is exactly what we did. This is not to say that we were the only people from the computer underground who went to various law enforcement agencies with information about MOD and their antics. In fact, the number of hackers who did was staggering, especially when you consider the usual anarchy of the underground. None of these other people ever get mentioned and those of us at Comsec always take the lead role as the "narks," but we were far from alone. MOD managed to alienate the vast majority of the computer underground, and people reacted. All in all, both in this piece, and in the book itself, "MOD, The Gang That Ruled Cyberspace," Quittner has managed to paint a far too apologetic piece about a group of people who cared so very little about the networks they played in and the people who live there. In the last 15 years that I've been skulking around online, people in the community have always tended to treat each other and the computers systems they voyeured with a great deal of care and respect. MOD was one of the first true examples of a groupthink exercise in hacker sociopathy. Selling long distance codes, selling credit card numbers, destroying systems and harassing innocent people is not acceptable behavior among ANY group, even the computer underground. There have always been ego flares and group rivalries in the underground, and there always will be. The Legion of Doom itself was FOUNDED because of a spat between its founder (Lex Luthor) and members of a group called The Knights of Shadow. These rivalries keep things interesting, and keep the community moving forward, always seeking the newest bit of information in a series of healthy one-upsmanship. MOD was different. They took things too far against everyone, not just against two people in Texas. I certainly don't condemn everyone in the group. I don't even know a number of them (electronically or otherwise.) I honestly believe that Mark Abene (Phiber) and Paul Stira (Scorpion) got royally screwed while the group's two biggest criminals, Julio Fernandez (Outlaw) and Allen Wilson (Wing), rolled over on everyone else and walked away free and clear. This is repulsive when you find out that Win in particular has gone on to be implicated in more damage to the Internet (as Posse and ILF) than anyone in the history of the computing. This I find truly disgusting, and hope that the Secret Service are proud of themselves. Imagine if I wrote a piece about the terrible treatment of a poor prisoner in Wisconsin who was bludgeoned to death by other inmates while guards looked away. Imagine if I tried to explain the fact that poor Jeff Dahmer was provoked to murder and cannibalism by the mocking of adolescent boys who teased and called him a faggot. How would you feel if I tried to convince you that we should look upon him with pity and think of him as a misunderstood political prisoner? You would probably feel about how I do about Quittner's story. 'Hacker' can just as easily be applied to "journalists" too, and with this piece Quittner has joined the Hack Journalist Hall of Fame, taking his place right next to Richard Sandza. Quittner did get a few things right. I do have a big cat named Spud, I do work at a computer company and I do sell fantastic t-shirts. Buy some. With Love, Chris Goggans aka Erik Bloodaxe =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Dec 1994 14:04:56 -0600 (CST) From: pkennedy Subject: File 2--More Legal Analysis of Steve Jackson Games (Legal Bytes) ((MODERATORS' COMMENT: The follow is reproduced from Legal Bytes, Vol 2, Number 2(Fall-Winter), 1994. Legal Bytes info: David H. Donaldson, Jr., Editor-in-Chief <> Peter D. Kennedy, Senior Editor Laura Prather, Contributing Editor Readers with an interest in law and cyberspace should subscribe directly, because Legal Bytes is currently the best single on-line source for these issues)). ================================ 1. FIFTH CIRCUIT TACKLES E-MAIL INTERCEPTION ISSUE IN STEVE JACKSON GAMES v. U.S. SECRET SERVICE Legal Bytes has followed this ground-breaking lawsuit brought by a small Austin, Texas game publishing company and others against the U.S. Secret Service for an illegal raid and seizure of the company's electronic bulletin board system called "Illuminati." Steve Jackson Games won over $50,000 in damages from the Secret Service because of its illegal raid, and the individuals each won $1,000 awards because the Secret Service illegally seized their electronic mail. The Secret Service paid the judgments and did not appeal. Steve Jackson Games and the others pressed forward with an appeal, on the one issue they lost -- their argument that the Secret Service, when it seized the bulletin board system not only illegally seized their mail, it also illegally intercepted some of those messages. From the users' point of view, the Secret Service raid did two things. First, the Secret Service walked off with all the mail in their mailboxes, and violated the Access to Stored Communication provision of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. 18 U.S.C. s 2701, et seq. Some of those messages had been written, addressed, and sent, but not yet delivered to their addressee. They were temporarily resident on the Illuminati BBS's hard drive when the Secret Service seized the Illuminati computer. The users argued that the seizure of this in-transit mail was a second, separate violation of law -- an illegal interception of their mail prohibited by the Wiretap Act. 18 U.S.C. s 2510, et seq. They argued that in-transit mail was different and important. These messages were especially sensitive and vulnerable: the senders had lost control over their messages, but the addressees had not yet received them. Neither party to the messages could choose to keep or throw away the message, and thereby could not be said to have purposely risked unintentional disclosure of their messages by choosing to store them. Further, the BBS model of "store and forward" of messages is replicated in all significant computer communications. Unlike the traditional model of a telephone conversation, which takes place effectively instantaneously, computer communications often reside some determinable period of time in temporary storage on their way to their final destination. The level of legal protection afforded BBS in-transit e-mail potentially affects most computer communications. The Illuminati BBS's users argument was simple -- the Wiretap Act (as amended by the ECPA in 1986) defines "interception" as "the aural or other acquisition of the contents of any wire, electronic, or oral communication through the use of any electronic, mechanical, or other device." The users argued that the Secret Service did, in fact, acquire the contents of the e-mail when it walked off with the machine, and that the Wiretap Act does not require that e-mail be in the process of transmission when it is acquired, only that it is somewhere between its origin and destination. If the users were right, the government would need a court wiretap order before seizing in-transit electronic communications, an even higher standard than that needed to gain access to stored electronic communications. The Secret Service took the position that the Wiretap Act and the Stored Communications provision were separate, non-overlapping laws -- and that the Wiretap Act's prohibition of "interception" only applied to acts that tap into a data stream and capture the communication as it moves through a wire or cable. The Stored Communications provision, the Secret Service argued, applies to all stored communications, including those in temporary storage incident to transmission. Whether e-mail has been accessed by its recipient is irrelevant; what matters is whether the message is sitting still, or moving through wires when it is caught by the government. The Fifth Circuit sided with the Secret Service. See 36 F.3d 457 (1994). It noted that the Wiretap Act defines "wire communications" as "aural transfers," and includes within the definition of "wire communications" those communications in electronic storage. In contrast, when the Act defines "electronic communications" as "any transfer" of data other than a wire communication, it does not include electronic storage of such communications. Further, the Act does define "stored communications" to include electronic communications in "temporary, intermediate storage ... incidental to the electronic transmission thereof." Reading these provisions, the Court concluded that Congress must have meant to exclude the seizure of in-transit e-mail from the coverage of the Wiretap Act, and to leave it controlled by the Stored Communications provision only.[fn2] [fn2: This raises an interesting question: what about the seizure of voice mail or answering machine recordings? These appear to be clearly "wire communications," not "electronic communications," because they record "aural transfers." If so, seizure of these recordings without a court order, at least before they are received by the intended recipient, would violate the Wiretap Act.] It is important to note that the Fifth Circuit's decision does not leave e-mail without protection. The Fifth Circuit noted clearly that the Secret Service, by seizing, reading and deleting the Illuminati BBS e-mail without authorization, had violated 18 U.S.C. s 2701. Although law enforcement need not (within the Fifth Circuit, at least) get a court wiretap order to seize in-transit e- mail, any government access to e-mail must still meet the requirements of the Stored Communications provision of the ECPA (and the Fourth Amendment), which is no easy task. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Jan 1995 12:58:52 -0500 (EST) From: eye WEEKLY Subject: File 3--The Stupid Net.Coverage News Awards -- 1994 and 1995 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ MEDIA MORON OF THE YEAR/MONTH CONTEST The stupid net.coverage media awards ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Oh! Hello, there... We at eye.NET NEWSMEDIA LABS are working hard at charting the exciting and historical merger of establishment newsmedia with the Internet. If you hush a moment, and listen very very carefully... you can hear a newsroom editor somewhere whimpering right now as s/he faces yet another net story. And, as is said, every time a newseditor suffers, an angel gets its wings. We've read NetNews for years. Like you, we have countless delightful reading memories. But none have brought us so much cheer as when netters from around Our Beautiful Blue Planet upload ascii copies of moronic media stories to newsgroups and mailing lists. It's time to formally recognize this great media contribution to our simultaneous anxiety and mirth. We officially announced the Stupid Net.Coverage Awards back in November 1994. We are asking for your help in formalizing this into the MEDIA MORON OF THE MONTH/YEAR contest -- rather like alt.usenet.kooks' "Kook of the Month" award, open for voting from the itself. When you see media coverage of the net that is painfully dumb, don't just fume or laugh derisively. Forward a copy to and post it to . All submissions will be permanently archived in a Stupid Net.Coverage Media Awards page at our web site ( And, most exciting of all, the winner will be contacted directly by phone and asked for comment. These reactions will also be stored. Winners will be announced in hardcopy as well. By building these archives, it is a better world we also build. To provide us and our net.descendants with a view of how ill-informed many reporters really are on this subject -- after all, how else could Martha Siegel and Michael Wolff _convince_ media drones that ads are canceled for breaking some "Holy Than Thou Anti-Ad Commandment" rather than for being spams? Things other than ads have been Cancelmoosed(TM). And, with this handy resource, journalism school students will never have had it so easy, perhaps launching a new breed of net.literate reporters... And 1995 promises to be even wilder than 1994, what with the Righteous Minions of Small Business clamoring aboard and trying to paint the as "unfair" and "terrorists" -- or even, as Canter & Siegel have already tried to claim in their book, that there simply _is_ no It's an old trick of conquest: once a community is marginalized into insignificance, it's easier to eradicate it. Battle-lines are being drawn in the media itself. We at eye.NET hope the MEDIA MORON OF THE MONTH/Stupid Net.Coverage Media Awards will draw those lines more starkly, forcing reporters to wake up. Please help us spread joy and happiness to the millions who suffer under the weight of braindead media coverage of net issues. Share the wealth. Contribute now. And contribute often. Thank you. Malaclypse the Foetus eye.NET NEWSMEDIA LABS ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ MEDIA MORON OF THE MONTH FAQ The Stupid Net.Coverage News Awards "The fact that your voice is amplified to the degree where it reaches from one end of the country to the other does not confer upon you greater wisdom or understanding than you possessed when your voice reached only from one end of the bar to the other." -- Edward R Murrow CBS reporter, 1965 Try as one might, one human alone cannot collect all the Stupid Net Stories pouring out from the Fourth Estate -- so plentiful and weedlike they are, no one can never catch all. So let's us, the, pool our resources with a general and ongoing call for submissions. (You can certainly submit eye.NET stories if you like ;-) TWO CONTESTS 1994: MEDIA MORON OF THE YEAR. The year is over and we would like to invite people to submit their own choices for what was the stupidest piece of net reporting they encountered. We had our own list, and were prepared to deliberate upon it, but then realized we were undoubtedly missing important Stupid Net.Coverage for the above stated reasons -- there's too much of it. So dig through your archives and hard drives. Send a paragraph about why you think it is A MILESTONE IN STUPIDITY, along with the actual copy/transcript if possible. We will compile these and make them available for voting on Web and in . Voting details will be determined. Accepted nominations will be stored in our Web site and made available as an FAQ called, perhaps, Net.Legends.Newsmedia-1994. 1995: MEDIA MORON OF THE MONTH. We know these things start slow, but they eventually reach "critical mass" and take on a momentum of their own -- much as our friend Craig Dickson has accomplished with his Kook Of The Month award. We seek to take a page from Craig's grassroots movement apply the same tactics to newsmedia -- after all, newsmedia and kooks are uncomfortably synonymous when the net is involved. Post your submission in with the word NOMINATION in the subject line. It would also be helpful if you would email a copy to . We will then archive it in our web site. Nominations will be closed a week after the month ends and people can vote. PRIZE Winning reporters/news organizations will be directly contacted by eye by phone and asked for comment. We will arrange for the story and a picture of the reporter (if available) to be immortalized _in hardcopy_, as well as in web pages. (eye has a circulation of over 100k in Toronto.) When 1995 ends, the 12 monthly MORON winners will be presented for a general vote on which reigns supreme and deserves the prestigious Usenet MEDIA MORON OF THE YEAR award. The winner will, again, be contacted directly for comment and sent a Stylish Certificate suitable for framing at home or office. TYPICAL STUPID STORIES There are all sorts of stupid media stories about the net -- and they are _not_ the private domain of "trashy tabloids." In fact, most come >from organization which consider themselves serious news outlets. There seem five basic types: 1. SEX! HOMOSEXUAL RECRUITMENT! SNUFF FILMS! FEMALE DEGRADATION! PAEDOPHILES! -- By far the most common. To get really heated, reporters fall back on paedophiles -- Save The Children! Chicago Tribune columnist James Coates wrote a piece last summer about "Vito," an undoubtedly made-up paedophile who cruises IRC hoping to have sex with kids in wheelchairs. I understand Coates' pain: I cannot spend 10 minutes in IRC before someone asks if I'm a child in a wheelchair looking for a sex partner. (eye.NET -- 08.04.94) But it ain't just the mainstream media, so-called alternative media are often as terminally dense (pun intended). British Columbia's Adbusters magazine normally specializes in subversive anti-ad guerrilla warfare ("subvertising"). It's spoof ads are often nasty and terrific. But in the Winter 1995 issue, it decided to tackle the net. It presented the "Top Ten Internet Newsgroups" in order of Mbyte volume. They are:, alt.binaries.sounds.misc,, alt.binaries.multimedia alt.binaries.sounds.mods Erotica! TV! Supermodels! Oh no! Adbusters sees this as proof netters remain dupes of crass consumer culture: "While the Internet is often heralded as an intellectual Mecca, the bulk of Internet traffic measured in Mbytes, is no more intellectual than the reading material found on the top shelf of your corner store's magazine rack...." Had their reporter examined the list more closely, he might have noticed every one is an alt.binaries.* newsgroup. Binaries. Images, sounds, etc. A single picture can take 300k. One well-written, high-signal text post can take 10k. A PICTURE AIN'T WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS IN THIS MEDIUM, ADBUSTERS. All their story proves is that binaries take up more Mbytes than text posts. What a newsflash. Of course, their rush to support their own editorial slant does help perpetuate the myth among control freaks and conservatives that the net is really just the Marina-Sirtis-Topless-GIF highway. (eye.NET -- 01.12.94) 2. ANARCHY! DEATH! THE FALL OF ROME! -- Save the children! October 8 1994 issue of The Scotsman (Scotland's national newspaper) proves bad net.reporting is international. The paper reported on a mother's anguished warning that a disk her son owned that held a copy of _The Anarchist's Cookbook_ "looked just like all the other disks in the box." Mom seeks to warn mothers everywhere about the evil Cookbook and the way you can get it on the net. (You can buy the Anarchist's Cookbook at larger bookstore -- Barricade Books, New Jersey, available here in Toronto for $34.75 Canadian.) (eye.NET -- 11.22.94) 3. DRUGS! DEATH! THE FALL OF ROME! -- Save The Children! Ban alt.drugs! Canadian network CTV's ran a fullpage ad for something called _William Shatner's TEKWAR_ -- "In 2044, Drugs Aren't Sold On The Street. They're Sold On The Internet." The ad shows some white-bread-male-model pointing a plastic space-gun (it's 2044 after all) at some not-white-bread-male-model -- clearly right in the middle of an exciting drug bust on the infobahn. (eye.NET -- 11.22.94) 4. SPAM-LIBERATIONISTS -- There seems some genetic defect in reporters that does not permit them to understand that the backlash against C&S and Michael Wolff is not about "ads" but about spamming. Since Wolff -- the so-called who has published three books about cyberspace -- can't even figure out how to crosspost, it shouldn't be surprising he doesn't understand why he was Cancelmoosed(TM). Reporters simply believe his uninformed view of reality. (eye.NET -- several references; see for an Interview with Martha Siegel -- "A Net.Conspiracy So Immense...") 5. WHAT'S THIS BUTTON DO?! -- Watching copy editors struggle with basic terms is endlessly humorous. How many inaccurate names have they for "newsgroups," for instance? My favorite remains "computer billboards." (eye.NET -- 05.24.94) To be fair, missing obscure jargonese is more than forgivable. But the _depth_ of ignorance is often staggering. A recent Risks Digest contained an extreme example: From--Paul Fuqua Subject--Pentium + Spell-Checkers On December 5, the _Dallas Morning News_, not the most technically-aware newspaper in the world, ran an article from the _San Jose Mercury News_ about the recent Pentium FDIV situation. Unfortunately, they ran it through a spell-checker first. The company names "Intel" and "Megatest" became "Until" and "Megadeath," which actually puts an interesting slant on the story. I've only ever seen one writer's byline on computer-related articles in the DMN, so the root problem may be that no one else at the paper knows enough to catch this obvious (to us) error. NET.JOURNALISM 101 We net.citizens are really altruists at heart, full of care and compassion for our fellow human beings. How many of us have not stayed up into the wee hours helping yet another AOL-er struggle through that painful process of learning to decode topless Marina Sirtis GIFs? And we also hope to help the educationally-challenged members of in the Old Guard media! The MEDIA MORON OF THE MONTH contest is not done out of HATE but out of LOVE! We encourage our reporter cousins to get a After all, despite the futurist hype one oft hears, journalists will _not_ become redundant in an "info-age." Hard journalism skills will command greater value than ever as people, confronted by the info onslaught, scramble for ways to condense material into a consumable yet meaningful packages. Anyone can set up a newsprogram to collect 475 megs of news about specific subjects, but it still takes a human to synthesis this collection into a smaller-yet-greater whole. Reporters and editors might like to check out a couple of these resources... NEWSGROUPS: The main one is alt.journalism -- discussions of the craft itself. Please note: there is always some yahoo somewhere crossposting their latest flame wars here, sure that "IF ONLY THE PRESS KNEW, _THEY_ WOULD SMITE OUR ENEMIES." There are other subgroups: alt.journalism.criticism, alt.journalism.students, alt.journalism.newspapers,, etc. To chronicle the misadventures of the Fourth Estate in cyberspace, read -- which never seems to run out of flames about Time, Newsweek or the NY Times reportage. MAILING LISTS: CANCAR-L (, or CANadian Computer Assisted Reporting. Owned by Ryerson faculty Dean Tudor ( CANCAR-L invites members of the news media (and others) to discuss computer-assisted reporting (like the net) in Canada. CARR-L ( is an international version. GUILDNET-L ( Owned by Colin Perkel ( Strictly for members of newsmedia. Discusses _working conditions_ -- unionism, labor/management, health/safety, pay and equity, etc. MEDIA-NET: There's also Media-Net, a "Computer-Assisted Reporting Tool." It's a journalist-owned-and-operated service that helps journalists locate "experts," find case studies, ferret out photos, etc. "Just send in your name, your news organization, what you're working on, what your request is, your deadline and how to contact you." For info: contact Amy Plummer at MediaNet ( in Pennsylvania. 717-243-4285. * "When you run a picture of a nice clean-cut all-American girl like this, get her tits above the fold." -- Al Neuharth, founder of USA Today, at a page-one meeting * "Have you discovered the limitless range of computer porn? Have you discovered your kid/student discovering the same? I am a CBC TV journalist preparing a report on computer pornography and I am looking for people who are prepared to talk about their own experiences. "I'd like to meet some teenage kids who can navigate through the world of computer porn and who can show me what they've found. I'd also like to meet parents and teachers who have come across their kids/students exploring this world." -- CBC TV reporter Jeffrey Kofman Oct 10, to newsgroup ont.general * "I am a yellow journalist preparing a sensationalistic story on the information superhighway, and I am looking for people prepared to provide me with shocking and unrepresentative anecdotes from their own experiences." -- Justin Wells ( replies to Kofman in ont.general ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 13:32:52 -0800 From: email list server Subject: File 4--Alliance for Community Media -- Call for Workshops The DIAC conference this spring featured broad participation by representatives from the public access cable television community. Now the Internet community has the opportunity to reciprocate by participating in the annual conference of the Alliance for Community Media, the national association of public access stations. The Alliance's call for workshop proposals is attached below. On behalf of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR) and the Telecommunications Policy Roundtable of the Northeast (TPR-NE), I urge everyone to take advantage of this opportunity to promote the convergence of public interest digital and video media. This conference could be THE historical event that builds the bridges between groups in computers and television. Don't miss it -- submit a workshop proposal today! ======================================= Alliance for Community Media International Conference and Trade Show ======================================== July 5 - 8, 1995 Boston, Massachusetts INVITATION TO SUBMIT PROPOSALS FOR WORKSHOPS The Alliance for Community Media invites you to submit proposals for workshops for next year's annual international conference. Proposals may be for panel or roundtable discussions, debates, discussion papers, performances, participatory exercises, or other presentations in appropriate formats. As computer, telephone and television technologies converge, cable access offers models for democratic participation. Now is the time to help shape the new communications context, to ensure community input, media literacy, and attention to public needs. Now is the time to increase dialogue, visibility and participation in the crafting of future telecommunications policy. The four-day annual conference brings together people from across the US and the world who work to ensure community access to telecommunications, including staff of cable access, media arts, and community computing centers; public officials responsible for telecommunications policy and regulation; communications lawyers; video producers and exhibitors, activists, educators, and students. The Alliance actively builds coalitions with organizations that share a mission to open and preserve free access to telecommunications and media for the diverse voices that contribute to a creative society and a healthy democracy. Please submit workshop proposals in the following areas, or suggest additional topics. COMMUNICATIONS DEMOCRACY Framing Public Policy Other Countries, Other Models Community Development through Communications Meeting Diverse Needs: Economics, Culture, Language, Gender, Age, Ability What's Interactive? Freedom of Expression and Controversy ACCESS CENTERS OF THE FUTURE: COMMUNITY COMMUNICATIONS Funding and Resources: Collaborating with Arts and Community Agencies Traditional and Virtual Communities License Renewal Long-term Strategic Planning New (and not so new) Technologies: Computers, the Internet, Digital and Non-Linear Video, Networks, Non-Tech and Low-Tech Communications Creativity and Innovation: Independent Artists and Communities EDUCATION Media Literacy: Educating the Public Distance Learning Youth Talk to Youth: Showcase and Lab Youth Empowerment and Inspiration: Making an Impact REGULATORY ISSUES & STRATEGIES INTERNATIONAL CONNECTIONS Crossing Borders/Keeping Cultural Integrity Framing Communication as a Human Right Working On and Off Cable: Using Public Spaces, Satellites, Cyberspace Planning the 1996 Video Olympiade ACCESS CENTER MANAGEMENT, A to Z Board Development Rules, Procedures and Policies Financial Planning Accounting, Insurance, Required Filings and Other Nuts and Bolts Equipment Management Training Philosophies and Curricula Becoming Indispensible in Your Community PROPOSAL SUBMISSION Each session will be an hour and a half in length. A pre- conference session may last a half or full day. All sessions should substantially involve the audience. All proposals should include: 1. a session title 2. the format of the session, including audience participation 3. a substantial statement describing the proposed topic, its importance, and the desired purpose of the session 4. a list of proposed participants, including the chair, with brief biographical data 5. a resource list for further reference 6. your own name and phone number so we can contact you for further information We hope to publish the proposals, discussion papers and keynotes in a conference syllabus, so proposals must be well fleshed out, clear and informative to people who may not participate. We will also accept general ideas and suggestions for areas to be addressed and people to be included, even if you do not have a fully developed workshop plan. Electronic submissions are encouraged to: Mail hard copy or discs on Microsoft Word (Mac or PC) to: Alliance c/o MATV, 145 Pleasant St., Malden, MA 02148 Fax: (617) 321-7121 Phone inquiries to explore possibilities: Rika Welsh (617) 321-6400 FIRM DEADLINE FOR PROPOSALS IS JANUARY 31, 1995. A Programming Committee will review proposals and confirm decisions by early March. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1994 22:51:01 CDT From: CuD Moderators Subject: File 5--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 25 Nov 1994) Cu-Digest is a weekly electronic journal/newsletter. Subscriptions are available at no cost electronically. CuD is available as a Usenet newsgroup: Or, to subscribe, send a one-line message: SUB CUDIGEST your name Send it to LISTSERV@UIUCVMD.BITNET or LISTSERV@VMD.CSO.UIUC.EDU The editors may be contacted by voice (815-753-0303), fax (815-753-6302) or U.S. mail at: Jim Thomas, Department of Sociology, NIU, DeKalb, IL 60115, USA. Issues of CuD can also be found in the Usenet news group; on CompuServe in DL0 and DL4 of the IBMBBS SIG, DL1 of LAWSIG, and DL1 of TELECOM; on GEnie in the PF*NPC RT libraries and in the VIRUS/SECURITY library; from America Online in the PC Telecom forum under "computing newsletters;" On Delphi in the General Discussion database of the Internet SIG; on RIPCO BBS (312) 528-5020 (and via Ripco on internet); and on Rune Stone BBS (IIRGWHQ) (203) 832-8441. CuD is also available via Fidonet File Request from 1:11/70; unlisted nodes and points welcome. EUROPE: In BELGIUM: Virtual Access BBS: +32-69-844-019 (ringdown) In ITALY: Bits against the Empire BBS: +39-461-980493 In LUXEMBOURG: ComNet BBS: +352-466893 UNITED STATES: ( in /pub/CuD/ ( in /pub/Publications/CuD/ ( in /pub/eff/cud/ in /src/wuarchive/doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/ in /pub/wuarchive/doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/ in /doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/ EUROPE: in pub/doc/cud/ (Finland) in pub/cud/ (United Kingdom) JAPAN: /mirror/ The most recent issues of CuD can be obtained from the NIU Sociology gopher at: URL: gopher:// COMPUTER UNDERGROUND DIGEST is an open forum dedicated to sharing information among computerists and to the presentation and debate of diverse views. CuD material may be reprinted for non-profit as long as the source is cited. Authors hold a presumptive copyright, and they should be contacted for reprint permission. It is assumed that non-personal mail to the moderators may be reprinted unless otherwise specified. Readers are encouraged to submit reasoned articles relating to computer culture and communication. Articles are preferred to short responses. Please avoid quoting previous posts unless absolutely necessary. DISCLAIMER: The views represented herein do not necessarily represent the views of the moderators. Digest contributors assume all responsibility for ensuring that articles submitted do not violate copyright protections. ------------------------------ End of Computer Underground Digest #7.03 ************************************


E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank