Computer underground Digest Thu May 25, 1995 Volume 7 : Issue 42 ISSN 1004-042X Editors: J
Computer underground Digest Thu May 25, 1995 Volume 7 : Issue 42
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
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
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 (firstname.lastname@example.org)
The Time Is Now
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
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.
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
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
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-
* 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:
Please follow all instructions carefully. Please also put a link
to this page on your homepage.
send email to email@example.com.
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 email address
Are you a US Citizen (yes or no) (** IF NO, skip to last line)
Your Street Address (** USE ONLY ONE LINE)
Your Zip Code (**VERY IMPORTANT)
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 ---
1111 State Street, Apt. 31 B
--- 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
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
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).
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]
1111 State Street, Apt. 31 B
[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
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
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
* 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
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
For More information on the Communications Decency Act issue:
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 firstname.lastname@example.org
Current status of the CDA issue email@example.com
Chronology of events of the CDA issue firstname.lastname@example.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) email@example.com
Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) firstname.lastname@example.org
Feminists For Free Expression (FFE) FFE@aol.com
Florida Coalition Against Censorship email@example.com
Hands Off! The Net firstname.lastname@example.org
Inner Circle Technologies, Inc. aka. NovaLink
League for Programming Freedom email@example.com
National Libertarian Party firstname.lastname@example.org
Marijuana Policy Project MPProject@AOL.com
National Public Telecomputing Network (NPTN) email@example.com
National Writers Union (UAW Local 1981 AFL-CIO) firstname.lastname@example.org
Panix Public Access Internet email@example.com
People for the American Way firstname.lastname@example.org
Society for Electronic Access email@example.com
The WELL firstname.lastname@example.org
Voters Telecommunications Watch (VTW) email@example.com
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
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
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
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.
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
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
**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.
* Americans Have No Identity, But They Do Have Wonderful Teeth, Jon
* Cyberwar, God And Television: Interview with Paul Virilio, Louise
* Digital City, Amsterdam, Shuschen Tan.
* European Borders: History Of Space / Space Of History, J. Peter
* 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,
* 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
* 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
* 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.
* Auto-Eulogy For The Citizen-Activist, Richard DeLaurell.
Chantal Mouffe, ed. Dimensions of Radical Democracy:
* Baudrillard's Remainder, Andrew Wernick.
Jean Baudrillard, The Transparency Of Evil: Essays On Extreme
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
* Review: Digitaler Schein, Geert Lovink.
Florian Roetzer, ed., Digitaler Schein, Aesthetik der
* Diplomatics, J. Peter Burgess.
James Der Derian, Antidiplomacy: Spies, Terror, Speed, and War
* Draculaland, m-angle-angel.
* Drug Hysteria: U.S.A., Critical Art Ensemble.
John Strausbaugh and Donald Blaise, eds., The Drug User: Documents
* 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
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
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
Paul Gilroy, The Black Atlantic: Modernity and Double
* Neither Liberal Nor Communitarian: Feminism, Political Theory,
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
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,
Gwynne Basen, Margrit Eichler, Abby Lippman, eds., Misconceptions:
The Social Construction of Choice and the New Reproductive
* The Revolution Will Be Televised, W. Ted Rogers.
Richard Stivers, The Culture of Cynicism: American Morality In
* 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
* 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,
Guy Debord, In Girum Imus Nocte Et Consumimurm Igni: a Film
* Will The Opposable Thumb Become The Appendix Of The Future?, Tom
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
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
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,
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
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
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:firstname.lastname@example.org
In ITALY: Bits against the Empire BBS: +39-464-435189
In LUXEMBOURG: ComNet BBS: +352-466893
UNITED STATES: etext.archive.umich.edu (188.8.131.52) in /pub/CuD/
ftp.eff.org (184.108.40.206) in /pub/Publications/CuD/
aql.gatech.edu (220.127.116.11) 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
The most recent issues of CuD can be obtained from the
Cu Digest WWW site at:
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