=========================================================================
 
INFO-ATARI16 Digest         Sun, 24 Dec 89       Volume 89 : Issue  856
 
Today's Topics:
        Copyrights and Commercial Networks and Usenet (2 msgs)
                        LHARC source and UNIX
                    Loneliness in the Atari World?
                            Lynx protocol
               Re: Facts, not only talking about them.
                          The Use of Rapenet
               Usenet -> GEnie Link Considered Harmful
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Date: 24 Dec 89 04:33:57 GMT
From: rochester!kodak!elmgate!jdg@rutgers.edu  (Jeff Gortatowsky CUST)
Subject: Copyrights and Commercial Networks and Usenet
Message-ID: <1181@elmgate.UUCP>
 
In article <KARL.89Dec21144149@giza.cis.ohio-state.edu>
 karl@giza.cis.ohio-state.edu (Karl Kleinpaste) writes:
>canada@crash.cts.com writes:
>   This is the part that concerns me the most.  According to an author who
>   specializes in books on copyrights:
>       ``The matter of Dave violating or not violating the law is totally
>       up to USENET, not the attorney general.  You see, these laws are
>       not enforced unless someone cries "fowl".
>
>Flamingo!  Er, ostrich!  No, I mean, uh, loon!  Yeah, that's it.
>LOON!
>
>(For the humor-impaired, :-)
>
Hehehehehehe....
 
 
On a more serious note. If anyone is aware of comp.unix.wizards and their
respective net.worlds, they have stated for quite sometime that they would
like to get entirely rid of comp.other.worlds entirely for the sake of
savings of groups of bandwidth & so everyone can "really" get things done.
Usenet in itself in "original conception" was to be a place to extend
everyone's unixsex abilitys. And, for quite sometime they argued back & fro
about trying to ax all other non-pertenant newsgroups alltogether. Sort of
a comp.apocalypse of sorts. (hehehe).
 
 
 
 
--
Jeff Gortatowsky-Eastman Kodak Company  .....rochester!kodak!elmgate!jdg
(use uuhosts or such to find path to rochester)
Eastman Kodak makes film not comments.  Therefore these comments are mine
not theirs.
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 24 Dec 89 07:42:38 GMT
From: well!dsmall@apple.com  (David Small)
Subject: Copyrights and Commercial Networks and Usenet
Message-ID: <15200@well.UUCP>
 
The base note, SIGH!, discusses Genie's anthology-copyright on USENET notes.
 
        Diane, I would appreciate it if you would stop discussing a
HYPOTHETICAL thing -- GEnie attempting to place an anthology copyright on
USENET notes -- in such "guilty until proven innocent" tones.
 
        The entire USENET<-> Genie link is *experimental*. If the management
there was not VERY flexible and open to new ideas, it wouldn't be there at
all. I fully expect to be able to drop them a line after they get back from
holidays, and come back to the newsgroup here with the assurance they will
do no such thing. I'll even get 'em to sign it in blood.
 
        Look, they WANT this to work out! Not to leech profits, not for
base motives, but to provide their users with services. Anyone who thinks that
at $6/hr GEnie is ripping people off has never run a mainframe plus nationwide
telephone access service -- it's cheap. I have found GEnie willing to
support EXTREMELY experimental and new ideas in RoundTables, that won't make
money (if at all) for years.
 
        They're in trying, Diane, and you're in here poisoning the water,
telling us what Dark and Evil things await.
 
        Diane, if they try *ONCE* to put an anthology copyright on USNET
notes, I'll have nothing more to do with them. There, you can hold me to
it.
 
        Now would you PLEASE let there be a little "innocent until proven
guilty" here in this link discussion? I know USENET has been burned by CIS
and BIX (I know *now*, not 4 days ago); but give GEnie a chance -- and me,
too, huh?
 
        I'm very tired of paranoid views of large companies always being
profit-mongering evil entities, out to stamp out anything good in the world.
Such stuff belongs in tired propaganda.
 
        -- sincerely, Dave Small / Gadgets
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 24 Dec 89 04:54:39 GMT
From: rochester!kodak!elmgate!jdg@rutgers.edu  (Jeff Gortatowsky CUST)
Subject: LHARC source and UNIX
Message-ID: <1182@elmgate.UUCP>
 
In article <51989@ccicpg.UUCP> paulm@ccicpg.UUCP (tmp Paul Moreau usenet acct)
 writes:
>Well it seems that the LHARC is going to take over the atari archiving
>world.  I for one use a UNIX system for posting and recieving news
>and binaries.   I uudecode, and unarc on the unix system and examine
>the stuff before going through the expense of going home, making a
>LONG DISTANCE call to work and download the stuff.  If LHARC is to be
>the new standard (which I can see the benefit in smaller archives) I'd
>like to get the source so I can port it to our UNIX system.
>If the source is protected (which it seems to be) then I don't think
>I'll be downloading any more files unless I know what to expect in them.
>
>I hope that the source is available!
>I think that the majority of readers on the net here are on UNIX machines
>and would also like to get LHARC on thiers also.
 
Sources to LHARC on the IBM are readily available on any half-inept IBM
BBS. I have heard mention that the ST version is incompatible. If this is
the case, someone should port the PC source instead of creating confusions
between the two (the MAC has it too I think). I have glazed over the sources
on several occasions (and to be honest, the "idea" itself of
Lempel->Ziv->Huffman coding is a natural, so obvious its funny it wasnt
discovered quite some years back) and do believe it could be sped up, and
could get better compression yet (although not "drastic") by using a
run-length-encode after the huffman squeeze. Since it's just bufferin'
a byte of output bits, then writing the byte out, it'd be nothin' to buffer
"more" bits before the output, and RLE the bits. MANY storage devices
(that have any sorta brains about em') do exactly that, in hardware. Since
LHARC is already slow (due to it's iterative nature and semi-efficient trees)
whats a few seconds more?. And as I stated, I do beleive LHARC in itself can
be sped up. While using arrays for tree's is fast on access times, it is not
in insertions and deletions. I beleive a "pre-formed" dynamic tree ala'
pointers couls speed it up (and some other tiny items).
 
 
--
Jeff Gortatowsky-Eastman Kodak Company  .....rochester!kodak!elmgate!jdg
(use uuhosts or such to find path to rochester)
Eastman Kodak makes film not comments.  Therefore these comments are mine
not theirs.
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 23 Dec 89 22:37:49 GMT
From:
 zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uflorida!news@tut.cis.ohio-st
 ate.edu  (Michael Murphy)
Subject: Loneliness in the Atari World?
Message-ID: <21566@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU>
 
The thing I want to know about Atari, that NOBODY has been able to
explain to me so far, is why it seems to be ignoring the US?  WHY dont
we have good advertising?  Why dont we have good support?  WHY can't
the few dealers we have out there seem to get the products in any
reasonable length of time?  What is the problem?  The ST is a great
machine, and  I am happy I have one, but I am angry at the way the ST
users are treated.  Any questions/comments?
From: cr1@beach.cis.ufl.edu (Christopher Roth)
Path: beach.cis.ufl.edu!cr1
 
 
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
*     Christoper Roth                         *  This message is NOT for
*     InterNet  :  cr1@beach.cis.ufl.edu      *  GENIE's use!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-Post No Bills-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 24 Dec 89 10:21:35 GMT
From: well!ewhac@apple.com  (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab)
Subject: Lynx protocol
Message-ID: <15205@well.UUCP>
 
In article <1180@nsscb.UUCP> tjm@nsscb.UUCP (Timothy J. Murphy) writes:
>[ Howzit work? ]
 
        It's serial.  The baud rate is programmable.  Also the protocol may
not necessarily be the same from game to game.  Remember, this is a Toy;
there ain't no operating system, so the game authors can do anything they
want to the hardware.
 
        There are specifications laid down for Lynx development, and plenty
of example code and core routines, but the developers are free to ignore
them (at their own risk, of course).
 
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
Leo L. Schwab -- The Guy in The Cape    INET: well!ewhac@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU
 \_ -_          Recumbent Bikes:        UUCP: pacbell > !?well,unicom?!ewhac
O----~o       The Only Way To Fly.            hplabs / (pronounced "AE-wack")
         "Because you never know who might want to sit in your lap."
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 24 Dec 89 00:17:13 GMT
From: eru!luth!sunic!lth.se!newsuser@bloom-beacon.mit.edu  (Ralph Haglund)
Subject: Re: Facts, not only talking about them.
Message-ID: <1989Dec24.001713.27500@lth.se>
 
As Steven Grimm says, my posting about the STE was a concentrate of a German
article, meanwhile I HAVE signed something as an official developer. What
bothers me there is: Alan Pratt talked about the risk of making errors when
I reveal secrets. As Atari hasn't published technical material for non-deve-
lopers does that mean that all technical books about Atari ST are either
illegal, or that they are produced by hackers who have disassembled programs???
If the latter, isn't THERE a chance of errors popping up that could have been
avoided with some help from Atari Corp.?
 
Ralph
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 24 Dec 89 07:22:44 GMT
From: well!dsmall@apple.com  (David Small)
Subject: The Use of Rapenet
Message-ID: <15198@well.UUCP>
 
As you'll see in the "link is down" post, the link has been down since the
first day I got mail indicating the problems with it. At the time, I had not
heard of the hassles USENET has had with Brad, CIS, BIX, and whatnot. I had
no idea what I was getting myself into.
 
        I'm writing this in hope of helping to stop this disucssion before
it gets out of hand. No malice was intended at all, and there's a lot of
hearsay and innuendo going on. Please read the "link is down" post, and we
can end this in time for the new year.
 
        -- thanks, Dave / Gadgets
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 24 Dec 89 07:26:21 GMT
From: well!dsmall@apple.com  (David Small)
Subject: Usenet -> GEnie Link Considered Harmful
Message-ID: <15199@well.UUCP>
 
I'm writing this (brief) note to help bring the discussion to the close.
The USENET-> GEnie link is down and will stay down until many, many things
are cleared up, like 2-way access, email, etc. I've posted a fuller
explanation
of my intent and what happened .. which I can sum up with, *sigh* ... in the
"link is down" note.
 
        I wanted to do this to hopefully cap the discussion; it's about
something that no longer exists. Ever since I got the first batch of email
teling me of the problems with the idea, I shut the thing down, and it's
stayed off since, okay?
 
        Now can we please get back to a discussion of Chaos Strikes Back?
 
        -- thanks, Dave / Gadgets
 
------------------------------
 
End of INFO-ATARI16 Digest V89 Issue #856
*****************************************
