Computer underground Digest Thu May 25, 1995 Volume 7 : Issue 42 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 Thu May 25, 1995 Volume 7 : Issue 42 ISSN 1004-042X Editors: Jim Thomas and Gordon Meyer (TK0JUT2@MVS.CSO.NIU.EDU Archivist: Brendan Kehoe Shadow Master: Stanton McCandlish Field Agent Extraordinaire: David Smith Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala Ian Dickinson Goddess of Judyism Editor: J. Tenuta CONTENTS, #7.42 (Thu, May 25, 1995) File 1--From EFFector Online 08.06--NEW Petition against Exon Bill! File 2--ACLU's Analysis of Revised Exon File 3--CTHEORY homepage - E-journal of Computer Culture Reviews File 4--Advertising on CuD? Say it isn't so... File 5--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 19 Apr, 1995) CuD ADMINISTRATIVE, EDITORIAL, AND SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION APPEARS IN THE CONCLUDING FILE AT THE END OF EACH ISSUE. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 22 May 1995 21:36:24 -0400 From: editor@EFF.ORG Subject: File 1--From EFFector Online 08.06--NEW Petition against Exon Bill! CAMPAIGN TO STOP THE EXON/GORTON COMMUNICATIONS DECENCY ACT Update: -Bill is on the Senate floor -Please act to help Leahy stop the Exon censorship bill PETITION TO HELP SENATOR LEAHY STOP THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL COMMUNICATIONS DECENCY ACT May 19, 1995 PLEASE WIDELY REDISTRIBUTE THIS DOCUMENT WITH THIS BANNER INTACT REDISTRIBUTE ONLY UNTIL June 9, 1995 REPRODUCE THIS ALERT ONLY IN RELEVANT FORUMS Distributed by the Voters Telecommunications Watch (vtw@vtw.org) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ CONTENTS The Time Is Now Another Petition? What Is Sen. Leahy Proposing? How To Sign The Petition The Petition Statement Signing the petition from Fidonet or FTN systems For More Information List Of Participating Organizations ------------------------------------------------------------------------ THE TIME IS NOW HELP SENATOR LEAHY STOP THE EXON COMMUNICATIONS DECENCY ACT The Senate is expected to on vote the Communications Decency Act (CDA, a.k.a. the Exon Bill) within the next three weeks. The Communications Decency Act, in its current form, would severely restrict your rights to freedom of speech and freedom of expression online, and represents a grave threat to the very nature and existence of the Internet as we know it today. Without your help now, the Communications Decency Act will likely pass and the net may never be the same again. Although the CDA has been revised to limit the liability of online service providers, it would still criminalize the transmission of any content deemed "obscene, lewd, lacivious, filthy, or indecent," including the private communications between consenting adults. Even worse, some conservative pro-censorship groups are working to amend the CDA to make it even more restrictive. Currently, Senator Exon is negotiating with pro-censorship groups and commercial entities that would be affected by the CDA. The voices of Internet users must be heard now. We need to demonstrate that we are a political force to be reckoned with. In an effort to preserve your rights in cyberspace, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) has introduced the only legislative alternative to the Communications Decency Act. Senator Leahy is willing to offer his bill as a substitute for the CDA, but needs your support behind his efforts. Senator Leahy's legislation would commission a study to examine the complex issues involved in protecting children from controversial content while preserving the First Amendment, the privacy rights of users, and the free flow of information in cyberspace. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ANOTHER PETITION? Yes. With a strong showing of support from the net.community, Senator Leahy can offer his bill as a substitute for the Communications Decency Act when the Senate votes on the issue later this month. Senator Leahy needs and wants to demonstrate to his colleagues in the Senate that the net.community is behind him in his efforts. We must rise to the task and demonstrate that we will not sit idly by as our rights are threatened. Senator Leahy, a strong civil liberties advocate, has been the Senate's most vocal critic of the Exon/Gorton Communications Decency Act, and has taken a leading role in defending the rights and civil liberties of Internet users. Senator Leahy has taken a great political risk in representing the interests of Internet users on Capitol Hill. The time has come for us to show our appreciation and our support for his efforts. The previous petition against the Communications Decency Act generated over 108,000 signatures, and was instrumental in Senator Leahy's decision to offer his alternative As the Senate moves to vote on the CDA, we must act quickly to ensure that our collective voice continues to be heard. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ WHAT IS LEAHY PROPOSING? Senator Leahy's bill, S. 714, would direct the Department of Justice and the Department of Commerce to commence a 5 month study to examine: * Current law enforcement authority to prosecute the distribution of pornography over computer networks; * Whether any additional law or law enforcement resources are necessary; * The availability of technological capabilities, consistent with the First Amendment and the free flow of information in Cyberspace, to protect children from accessing controversial commercial and non- commercial content; * Ways to promote the development and deployment of such technologies. After conducting the study, the Justice Department must report to Congress on its findings, and, if necessary, recommend changes in current law. Leahy's bill represents the only substantive legislative alternative to the Communications Decency Act, and will buy important time to have a detailed and rational discussion about the issues involved in protecting children from controversial content, and avoid the rush to censorship which is occurring now on the Senate Floor. Without a strong show of support for Leahy's bill, the Communications Decency Act is very likely to pass. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ WHAT CAN I DO? Please Sign the petition in support of Senator Leahy's alternative. There are two ways to sign: 1. World Wide Web: URL:http://www.cdt.org/petition.html Please follow all instructions carefully. Please also put a link to this page on your homepage. 2. email: send email to petition@cdt.org. Please provide the following information EXACTLY AS SHOWN. INCORRECT SUBMISSIONS CANNOT NOT BE COUNTED! Be sure that you make a carriage return at the end of each line Your Name Your email address Are you a US Citizen (yes or no) (** IF NO, skip to last line) Your Street Address (** USE ONLY ONE LINE) Your City Your State Your Zip Code (**VERY IMPORTANT) Country PRIVACY POLICY: Information collected during this campaign will not be used for any purpose other than delivering a list of signers to Congress and compiling counts of signers from particular states and Congressional districts. It will not be reused, sold, rented, loaned, or available for use for any other purpose. All records will be destroyed immediately upon completion of this project. --- sample email submission --- To: petition@cdt.org From: everybody@ubiquitous.net Subject--signed Every Body everybody@ubiqutious.net YES 1111 State Street, Apt. 31 B Any Town CA 94320 USA --- sample email submission --- Multiple signatures will not be counted, so please only sign once. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ THE PETITION STATEMENT We the undersigned users of the Internet are strongly opposed to the "Communications Decency Act" (Title IV of S. 652), which is currently pending before the Senate. This legislation will severely restrict our rights to freedom of speech and privacy guaranteed under the constitution. Based on our Nation's longstanding history of protecting freedom of speech, we believe that the Federal Government should have no role in regulating the content of constitutionally protected speech on the Internet. We urge the Senate to halt consideration of the Communications Decency Act and consider in its place S. 714, the "Child Protection, User Empowerment, and Free Expression In Interactive Media Study Bill", an alternative approach offered by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT). Signed: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SIGNING THE PETITION FROM FIDONET OR FTN SYSTEMS To sign the petition from FidoNet or other FTN systems, create a netmail message to your local UUCP host. Search the nodelist for the GUUCP flag, and use the address of that system: To: UUCP, [GUUCP system's address here. "To:" name MUST be set to UUCP] From: [you] Subject--signed _________________________________________________________________________ To: petition@cdt.org Every Body everybody@ubiqutious.net YES 1111 State Street, Apt. 31 B Any Town CA 94320 USA [Message starts on 3rd line. The second "To:" line with the internet email address MUST be the first line of the message body, and the blank line following that is REQUIRED. Mail will not be delivered by the gateways without it.] If you are unsure whether your FTN has an Internet gateway, or suspect it may use something other than a GUUCP nodelist flag, ask your network coordinators. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ PETITION RATIONALE We oppose the "Communications Decency Act", sponsored by Senators James Exon (D-NE) and Slade Gorton (R-WA), for the following reasons: * It criminalizes the transmission of constitutionally protected speech, including the private communications between consenting individuals; * It would violate privacy rights by protecting system administrators who take steps to ensure that their networks are not being used to transmit prohibited content, even if those steps include reading all messages, in violation of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA). * It fails to account for the unique characteristics of interactive media, including the tremendous control users have over the content they or their children receive. * It would give the Federal Communications Commission jurisdiction over online speech by giving the FCC authority to establish rules governing the distribution of content online; The Internet and other interactive communications technologies offer a unique opportunity for the free exchange of information and ideas, and embody the very essence of our nation's democratic traditions of openness, diversity and freedom of speech. As users of these technologies, we know perhaps better than anyone that there are other, less restrictive ways to protect children from controversial materials while preserving the First Amendment and the free flow of information. Senator Leahy's bill provides an opportunity to address the issues raised by the Communications Decency Act without restricting the free speech and privacy rights of users. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ FOR MORE INFORMATION Petition updates will be posted to appropriate newsgroups and other forums on a regular basis. To have the latest status report sent to you automatically, send email to: p-update@cdt.org If you have specific questions, or if you are interested in mirroring the petition page, contact Jonah Seiger Other petition related information can be found on the CDT petition page. URL:http://www.cdt.org/petition.html For More information on the Communications Decency Act issue: Web Sites URL:http://www.cdt.org/cda.html URL:http://www.eff.org/pub/Alerts/ URL:http://www.panix.com/vtw/exon/ FTP Archives URL:ftp://ftp.cdt.org/pub/cdt/policy/freespeech/00-INDEX.FREESPEECH URL:ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/Alerts/ Gopher Archives: URL:gopher://gopher.eff.org/11/Alerts URL:gopher://gopher.panix.com/11/vtw/exon Information By auto-reply email: If you don't have www/ftp/gopher access, you can get up-to-date information from the following autobots: General information on the CDA issue cda-info@cdt.org Current status of the CDA issue cda-stat@cdt.org Chronology of events of the CDA issue vtw@vtw.org with the subject "send events" ----------------------------------------------------------------------- LIST OF PARTICIPATING ORGANIZATIONS In order to use the net more effectively, several organizations have joined forces on a single Congressional net campaign to stop the Communications Decency Act. In alphabetical order: Californians Against Censorship Together BobbyLilly@aol.com Center For Democracy And Technology (CDT) info@cdt.org Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) info@eff.org Feminists For Free Expression (FFE) FFE@aol.com Florida Coalition Against Censorship pipking@mail.firn.edu Hands Off! The Net baby-x@phanton.com Inner Circle Technologies, Inc. aka. NovaLink League for Programming Freedom lpf@uunet.uu.net National Libertarian Party 73163.3063@compuserve.com Marijuana Policy Project MPProject@AOL.com MindVox system@phantom.com National Public Telecomputing Network (NPTN) info@nptn.org National Writers Union (UAW Local 1981 AFL-CIO) kip@world.std.com Panix Public Access Internet info@panix.com People for the American Way jlessern@reach.com Society for Electronic Access sea@sea.org The WELL info@well.com Voters Telecommunications Watch (VTW) vtw@vtw.org If you would like to add your organization to this list, contact Shabbir Safdar at VTW ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 May 1995 16:49:42 -0400 From: ACLUNATL@AOL.COM Subject: File 2--ACLU's Analysis of Revised Exon ACLU Cyber-Liberties Analysis: Revised Exon Amendment May 25, 1995 ---------------------------------------------- The American Civil Liberties Union has previously expressed its strong opposition to the "Communications Decency Act," introduced by Senator Exon as S. 314 and adopted by the Senate Commerce Committee as an amendment to the Telecommunications Competition and Deregulation Act of 1995. Yesterday, we obtained a revised version of the Exon Amendment, which was apparently written by members of Senator Exon's staff in consultation with representatives of online service providers, the Department of Justice, and pro-censorship lobbying groups. The following analysis presents the ACLU's objections to the revised draft and clarifies the ACLU's continuing concern that the Exon amendment, in its existing or revised form, violates both free speech and privacy rights. I. Interactive Cyberspace Must Not Be Constricted by Old Media Models The most fundamental flaw of the revised Exon amendment is that it still wrongly attempts to force the new interactive environment of cyberspace and online services into the censorship straitjacket foisted on old media. In fact, the Exon amendment even uses as its model the most restrictive of the old media. This is wrong-headed policy. It is also a violation of the Free Speech and Privacy guarantees of the Constitution and therefore unconstitutional. The Exon amendment would make the interactive environment one of the most censored segments of communications media when logic dictates that cyberspace, with its emphasis on user-choice and user-control, should make it the least censored. At a minimum, the extremely limited rules of content-regulation for print media, and the safeguards against censorship for print materials, should be applied to online communications. The ACLU, moreover, believes that the characteristics of cyberspace, including the private and interactive nature of the communication, dictates that cyberspace should be even more free than print. We stress that there is no revision of the Exon amendment -- no tinkering of its censorship provisions -- that eliminates this problem. The Exon amendment cannot be "fixed." It must be rejected. II. The Exon Amendment Would Still Restrict Online Communications to Those Appropriate for Children Section (d) of the revised Exon amendment would still unconstitutionally restrict all online content to that which is suitable for children. Even under existing case law, non-obscene speech that is deemed "indecent" is protected by the First Amendment. _Sable Communications v. FCC_, 492 U.S. 115 (1989). The Government may only regulate indecent speech if it establishes a compelling governmental interest in the regulation AND narrowly tailors the restriction to achieve that interest. _Id._ at 125. See also _Pacifica Foundation v. FCC_, 438 U.S. 726 (1978); _Carlin Communications v. FCC_, 749 F.2d 113 (2d Cir. 1984) (Carlin I); _Carlin Communications v. FCC_, 787 F.2d 846 (2d Cir. 1986) (Carlin II); _Dial Information Services v. Thornburg_, 938 F.2d 1535 (2d Cir. 1991). Indeed, much of what consenting adults prize about some of their personal communications could well be deemed by outsiders as "indecent" if addressed to a child. The revised draft, like the original Exon amendment, is unconstitutional because requiring users and content providers to reduce their content to what is suitable for children is not the least restrictive means for protecting minors from indecent material. The "justifications" for regulation of indecency in broadcasting and telephone audiotext services do not apply to interactive communications, in which users - including parents - have much more control over the content of the messages they receive. We are also prepared to argue that the "justifications" asserted for censorship in any of the old media, including print, do not apply to cyberspace. III. Some Specific Problems in the Revised Exon Draft Again, the ACLU strongly believes that the anti-cyberliberty Exon amendment cannot be "fixed." It needs to be defeated. So, even if all of these specific problems were solved, the Exon amendment would still be a terrible idea. Still, it may be useful to consider briefly some of the specific problems in the revised Exon draft. *Revised section (d) outlaws the online transmission of obscene materials without defining "obscenity." Using the test for obscenity articulated in Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 1 (1973), the federal government has chosen to stage prosecutions of online obscenity cases in conservative jurisdictions in order to take advantage of more restrictive "community standards." See Thomas v. United States, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, No. 94-6648 and No. 94-6649. This trend poses a severe threat that online users and providers will be forced to reduce content to that which would be acceptable under the "community standards" of the most conservative jurisdiction. The ACLU has filed an amicus brief in the Thomas case strongly opposing the government's misuse of the censorship laws. *Revised sections (d) and (e) extend liability for transmission of obscene or indecent communications to non-commercial in addition to commercial providers. This change would render the revised draft more restrictive of free speech than the original Exon amendment. *While revised section (f) provides some defenses for online service providers, these defenses place smaller system operators at risk because they cannot afford to assert the defenses in court. Moreover, the defenses are incomplete and many larger service providers would likely find themselves in jeopardy at the hands of prosecutors motivated by the political advantages of currying favor with certain pro-censorship groups. *Revised section (f)(2) fails to protect providers who cede editorial control to an entity "which the defendant knows or had reason to know intends to engage in conduct that is likely to violate this section." This could pose serious problems for Internet providers that may have "reason to know" that certain sites are likely to contain communications deemed to be obscene or indecent. *Revised section (f)(3) gives the Federal Communications Commission the power to issue regulations regarding methods in which providers may restrict access in order to avoid liability. Giving federal regulators the authority to determine the rules for distributing online content will radically affect the freedom of cyberspace and will have a severe direct effect and an equally severe chilling effect on online speech. *Revised section (f)(4) could still make it impossible for users or content providers to remedy a violation of rights by an online service provider if the service claimed it was attempting to comply with the Exon amendment. Conclusion The revised Exon draft continues to subject an industry that has blossomed without government control to an unprecedented amount of interference and intrusion over content. It gravely threatens the free flow of information and the diversity of content transmitted over online networks. To achieve the liberating potential of the information superhighway, Congress must ensure that interactive technologies enhance rather than stifle democratic values. The American Civil Liberties Union therefore opposes the Exon amendment, both in its original form and as revised. ------------------------------------------------- ACLU Free Reading Room gopher://aclu.org:6601 **NEW** ACLU Constitution Hall on AmericaOnline: keyword ACLU ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 May 1995 15:12:31 -0500 From: jthomas@SUN.SOCI.NIU.EDU(Jim Thomas) Subject: File 3--CTHEORY homepage - E-journal of Computer Culture Reviews ((MODERATORS NOTE: We came across the following homepage that journalists, academics, and other researchers might find useful. You can access at the www site listed, or you can access it through the CuD homepage at http://www.soci.niu.edu/~cudigest)) CTHEORY is an international, electronic review of books on theory, technology and culture. Sponsored by the Canadian Journal of Politicaland Social Theory, reviews are posted periodically of key books incontemporary discourse as well as theorisations of major "event-scenes"in the mediascape. You may also view CTHEORY by volume. _________________________________________________________________ ARTICLES * Americans Have No Identity, But They Do Have Wonderful Teeth, Jon Epstein. * Cyberwar, God And Television: Interview with Paul Virilio, Louise Wilson. * Digital City, Amsterdam, Shuschen Tan. * European Borders: History Of Space / Space Of History, J. Peter Burgess. * From False Consciousness To Viral Consciousness, Dianne Rothleder. * Gay Life/Queer Art, Fredrick Corey. * Hystericizing the Millennium, Jean Baudrillard. * Infobahn Blues, Robert Adrian. * The Kafka Chronicles Excerpt, Mark Amerika. * The Information War, Hakim Bey. * Kate Bornstein: A Transgender Transsexual Postmodern Tiresias, Shannon Bell. * The Language Of The Body, Kathy Acker. * Nietzsche at the Mall: Deconstructing the Consumer, Daniel R. White and Gert Hellerick. * No Reprieve For Sarajevo, Jean Baudrillard. * Pataphysics of Year 2000, Jean Baudrillard. * The Political Economy Of Virtual Reality: Pan-Capitalism, Arthur Kroker and Michael A. Weinstein. * Reversion of History, Jean Baudrillard. * Rise Of The Void Towards The Periphery, Jean Baudrillard. * Stories From The Bloodhut, Cynthia Meier, Kim Lowry, Lori Scheer, Jamie Lantz, Rhonda Hallquist,and Audrey Joy. * Strike Of Events, Jean Baudrillard. * The Technology Of Uselessness, Critical Art Ensemble. * Thawing Of The East, Jean Baudrillard. * Useless Technology, Critical Art Ensemble. * Venus In Microsoft: male mas(s)ochism and cybernetics, Stephen Pfohl. EVENT-SCENES * Autopsy Of A Non-Event: The German Election, Dirk vom Lehn. * Catastrophe Field: The LA Quake, David Cook. * Declaration For A Free And Unified Sarajevo, City Assembly of Sarajevo. * Death Is Dead, m-angle-angel. * The Hyper-Texted Body, Or Nietzsche Gets A Modem, Arthur Kroker and Michael Weinstein. * The Media Gesture Of Data Dandyism, Geert Lovink. * Michael Jordan Mogadishu, Arthur Kroker. * The Murder Trial: Genre Or Event-Scene?, Anita Brenner. * The One Idea System, Ignacio Ramonet. * Speed(racing): Ecstasy And Fascination, Javier Santiago-Lucerna. * Taiwan Data Heaven, Arthur Kroker. * Turkish (Retro-Fascist) Olympics, Michael A. Weinstein. * U/R, Mark A. Lunt. REVIEWS * Auto-Eulogy For The Citizen-Activist, Richard DeLaurell. Chantal Mouffe, ed. Dimensions of Radical Democracy: Pluralism,Citizenship, Community * Baudrillard's Remainder, Andrew Wernick. Jean Baudrillard, The Transparency Of Evil: Essays On Extreme Phenomena Mike Gane, ed., Baudrillard Live: Selected Interviews * A Cartesian View From Nowhere, Ken Hillis. Barbara Maria Stafford, Body Criticism: Imaging the Unseen in Enlightenment Art and Medicine * Celebrity As Simulacrum, Deena Weinstein. Joshua Gamson, Claims To Fame: Celebrity In Contemporary America * The Cinemachine, m-angle-angel. Steven Shaviro, The Cinematic Body * Describing Writing Describing, Ellen Zweig. Alberto Perez-Gomez, Polyphilo, or The Dark Forest Revisited * Detournement For Fun And [Political] Profit, W. Ted Rogers. Sunil Gupta, ed. Disrupted Borders: An Intervention In Definitions Of Boundaries. * Review: Digitaler Schein, Geert Lovink. Florian Roetzer, ed., Digitaler Schein, Aesthetik der Electronischen Medien * Diplomatics, J. Peter Burgess. James Der Derian, Antidiplomacy: Spies, Terror, Speed, and War * Draculaland, m-angle-angel. subREAL, Draculaland * Drug Hysteria: U.S.A., Critical Art Ensemble. John Strausbaugh and Donald Blaise, eds., The Drug User: Documents 1840-1960 * Farewells To American Culture, Work And Competition, David Cook. Lester Thurow, Head To Head Robert B. Reich, The Work Of Nations John Kenneth Galbraith, The Culture Of Contentment * Farewells To Justice, God, Politics And The European Way, David Cook. Heinrich Boll, Women In A River Landscape Albert Camus, The Fall Friedrich Durrenmatt, The Execution Of Justice Graham Greene, Dr. Fischer Of Geneva Or The Bomb Party * Feminism and Post (19th Century) History in Eastern Europe, Alexis Gosselin. Barbara Einhorn, Cinderella Goes to Market: Citizenship, Gender and Women's Movements in East Central Europe * Foucault's Virtual Passion, Hart Murphy. James Miller, The Passion of Michel Foucault * Fractured Flesh, Ken Hillis. Scott Bukatman, Terminal Identity: The Virtual Subject in Post-Modern Science Fiction * Review: Hard War/Soft War, Geert Lovink. Martin Stingelin and Wolfgang Scherer, eds., Hard War/Soft War, Krieg Und Medien * John Rawls: A Calvinist After-Image, Michael Weinstein. John Rawls, Political Liberalism * The Last Camus, David Cook. Albert Camus, Le premier homme * Lenin In Ruins, Alexis Gosselin. David Remnick, Lenin's Tomb: The Last Days of the Soviet Empire * Live Aronowitz: Dead Theories, David Cook. Stanley Aronowitz, The Politics of Identity Stanley Aronowitz, Roll over Beethoven Stanley Aronowitz, Dead artists: Live theories * Modernity, Postmodernity, Social Marginality, Kenneth Mostern. Phillip Bryan Harper,Framing the Margins: The Social Logic of Postmodern Culture Paul Gilroy, The Black Atlantic: Modernity and Double Consciousness * Neither Liberal Nor Communitarian: Feminism, Political Theory, Possibility, LeonardWilliams. Elizabeth Frazer And Nicola Lacey, The Politics Of Community: A Feminist Critique Of The Liberal-Communitarian Debate * Review: On Justifying The Hypothetical Nature Of Art, Geert Lovink. Robert Fleck, ed., On Justifying The Hypothetical Nature Of Art And The Non-Identicality Within The Object World * A Poet's Eye View Of The Uncommon Market, Tom P. Abeles. Jacques Darras, Beyond the Tunnel of History * Post Panoptic Mirrored Worlds, Kimberly Anne Sawchuk. David Gelertner, Mirror Worlds; or the day software puts the universe in a shoe box...how it will happen and what it willmean * Public Policy Of Eugenics, Eileen Manion. Christine Overall, Human Reproduction: Principles, Practices, Policies Gwynne Basen, Margrit Eichler, Abby Lippman, eds., Misconceptions: The Social Construction of Choice and the New Reproductive Technologies,Volume One * The Revolution Will Be Televised, W. Ted Rogers. Richard Stivers, The Culture of Cynicism: American Morality In Decline * RU Wetware?: Television as Cybernetics, Arthur Kroker. Tony Fry, ed., RUATV? Heidegger And The Televisual Geert Lovink and Rik Delhaas, eds., Wetware * The Spectacle Of Secrecy, Len Bracken. Guy Debord, Treatise on Secrets: Commentaires sur la societe du spectacle * Stolen Childhoods Redreamed, Stephen Pfohl. Kathy Acker, My Mother: Demonology, A Novel * Textual Power, Robert Moskal. Gunnar Olsson, Lines of Power/Limits of Language * Two Instances of Musical Postmodernism in Britain, Steve Gibson. his name is alive, Mouth By Mouth Gavin Bryars, Jesus' Blood Never Failed Me Yet * We Go Round and Round in the Night and Are Consumed by Fire, Stephen Pfohl. Guy Debord, In Girum Imus Nocte Et Consumimurm Igni: a Film * Will The Opposable Thumb Become The Appendix Of The Future?, Tom Abeles. Kevin Kelly, Out of Control _________________________________________________________________ CTHEORY is published with the assistance of the Dean of Arts and Scienceand the Department of Political Science, Concordia University, Montreal,Canada. The World Wide Web edition is made available through the kindassistance of the members of the English Server Collective at CarnegieMellon. Editors: Arthur and Marilouise Kroker, Editorial Board: Kathy Acker, Jean Baudrillard, Bruce Sterling, DavidCook, Berkeley Kaite, William Leiss, Geert Lovink, EileenManion, Hans Mohr, Alberto Perez-Gomez, Stephen Pfohl, Andrew Ross, KimSawchuk, Deena Weinstein, Michael Weinstein, AndrewWernick, Gail Valaskakis. Editorial Assistant: Michael Boyle Artists in Residence: STELARC (Australia), Art in Ruins (UK), Mark Lewis(Canada), subReal (Romania), Critical Art Ensemble (USA) World Wide Web Editor: Carl Steadman, CD-ROM/Multi-Media Editor: Steve Gibson The disk (DOS/Mac) version of CTHEORY may be ordered from CJPST, Concordia University, 1455 de Maisonneuve, O., Montreal, Canada, H3G1M8. Institutional orders may be placed through UMI, Ann Arbor, Michigan. CTHEORY is indexed in International Political Science Abstracts/Documentation politique international, Sociological AbstractInc., Advance Bibliography of Contents: Political Science andGovernment, Canadian Periodical Index, and Film and Literature Index. _________________________________________________________________ 5 March 1995 Carl Steadman / ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 May 1995 11:19:34 -0500 (CDT) From: jerryw@IMAGINE.CONVEX.COM(Jerry Whelan) Subject: File 4--Advertising on CuD? Say it isn't so... I just read the latest CuD (7.41) and had to wonder about the O'Reilly press release. O'Reilly is generally a good netizen, but I don't see how their $500 web server has much to do with the topics that that CuD deals with. After all, I don't remember seeing Netscape's press release for their servers in the CuD... =========== ((MODERATORS' RESPONSE: Jerry Whelan raises a legitimate point that deserves an answer. CuD policy is to try to run articles that we believe are of interest to the dramatically diverse readership. Sometimes, these are promotional posts. Most promos are inappropriate. But, in some cases, and O'Reilly is one of them, there is interest in what they're doing, whether a promo or not. O'Reilly puts out the best line of Unix texts around, and that, coupled with the generally informative nature of much of their promo material, makes many of their promos newsworthy. We should point out that we have run promos for web browsers, such as Slipknot. We haven't run Netscape because they have not provided us with any information. We agree with Jerry's concern that there is no place for blatant hucksterism in CuD, and we thank him for helping us try to maintain the delicate balance while walking that thin line between readership interest and inappropriate commercialism. For the cynics, no, CuD receives no compensation of any kind for run promos or any other post.)) ------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1995 22:51:01 CDT From: CuD Moderators Subject: File 5--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 19 Apr, 1995) Cu-Digest is a weekly electronic journal/newsletter. Subscriptions are available at no cost electronically. CuD is available as a Usenet newsgroup: comp.society.cu-digest Or, to subscribe, send a one-line message: SUB CUDIGEST your name Send it to 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. To UNSUB, send a one-line message: UNSUB CUDIGEST Send it to LISTSERV@VMD.CSO.UIUC.EDU (NOTE: The address you unsub must correspond to your From: line) Issues of CuD can also be found in the Usenet comp.society.cu-digest 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) Brussels: STRATOMIC BBS +32-2-5383119 2:291/759@fidonet.org In ITALY: Bits against the Empire BBS: +39-464-435189 In LUXEMBOURG: ComNet BBS: +352-466893 UNITED STATES: etext.archive.umich.edu (192.131.22.8) in /pub/CuD/ ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4) in /pub/Publications/CuD/ aql.gatech.edu (128.61.10.53) in /pub/eff/cud/ world.std.com in /src/wuarchive/doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/ uceng.uc.edu in /pub/wuarchive/doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/ wuarchive.wustl.edu in /doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/ EUROPE: nic.funet.fi in pub/doc/cud/ (Finland) ftp.warwick.ac.uk in pub/cud/ (United Kingdom) JAPAN: ftp.glocom.ac.jp /mirror/ftp.eff.org/Publications/CuD ftp://www.rcac.tdi.co.jp/pub/mirror/CuD The most recent issues of CuD can be obtained from the Cu Digest WWW site at: URL: http://www.soci.niu.edu:80/~cudigest/ 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 #7.42 ************************************

---

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank