Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #165259 > unrolled thread
| Started by | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-06-15 13:22 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-06-18 13:00 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 529 — 41 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers
"Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-15 13:22 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-16 12:30 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-16 13:01 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-17 04:21 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust pechter@pechter.net (William Pechter) - 2016-06-18 18:56 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-19 13:31 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-19 16:59 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-06-22 16:41 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-16 07:58 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-16 08:13 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Al Kossow <aek@bitsavers.org> - 2016-06-16 10:38 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Al Kossow <aek@bitsavers.org> - 2016-06-16 10:44 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Al Kossow <aek@bitsavers.org> - 2016-06-16 10:46 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-16 13:27 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-16 19:08 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-17 12:51 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-17 14:11 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-17 21:22 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-17 16:47 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-17 23:02 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-18 09:12 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-18 11:49 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-18 15:47 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-01 19:09 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-18 17:32 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 19:07 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-17 16:33 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-06-17 17:19 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-17 19:54 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-18 00:47 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 15:48 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 15:44 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-06-18 22:40 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 05:05 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-20 13:12 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-01 19:20 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-17 02:30 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-16 22:26 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-20 13:20 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-20 19:47 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-21 09:02 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 04:14 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-21 11:42 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-21 10:24 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-21 12:08 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-21 17:13 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-21 07:05 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-21 13:16 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-06-21 12:44 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-21 14:01 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-21 14:20 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-22 06:35 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-22 05:43 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 18:44 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-06-22 08:52 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 09:49 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-06-22 13:17 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 14:11 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 14:22 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-06-22 21:03 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-23 14:17 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-22 23:47 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-23 09:11 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 05:17 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-06-23 07:51 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 20:52 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-24 12:30 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-25 09:03 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-25 05:23 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-25 19:59 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-23 12:10 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-23 13:08 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 20:47 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-24 12:33 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-24 17:14 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-24 20:13 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-24 21:59 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-25 08:49 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-25 12:10 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-25 12:00 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-25 07:31 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-25 12:40 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust maus <mausg@mail.com> - 2016-06-25 12:05 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-25 14:07 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-25 15:31 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-25 15:51 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-25 19:59 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-25 21:45 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Anonymous <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-26 01:16 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-25 18:47 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-25 20:12 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-28 10:43 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-28 08:36 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@Last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-28 16:47 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-28 19:41 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-29 09:14 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-29 10:42 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-29 10:04 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-29 12:28 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-29 17:52 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-29 12:15 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-29 15:45 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-29 15:29 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-29 08:32 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-29 16:08 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-29 18:45 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-30 18:08 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-29 18:02 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-29 19:37 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-29 17:11 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-29 22:31 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-30 18:54 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-30 13:22 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-30 22:49 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-01 08:35 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-01 12:33 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-01 18:19 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-01 13:29 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-07-03 15:12 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-01 11:27 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-01 12:33 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-01 16:40 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-07-01 21:46 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-01 23:21 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 04:08 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-05 13:21 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-05 09:55 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-02 07:20 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-07-02 07:36 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-02 12:59 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-07-02 13:30 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-03 13:33 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Elliott Roper <nospam@yrl.co.uk> - 2016-07-03 17:55 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-04 17:07 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-04 15:33 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:32 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-05 18:48 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-05 19:39 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-06 08:15 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-06 12:54 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-04 21:19 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-04 16:48 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-04 21:25 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-05 09:26 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-05 12:08 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-05 06:36 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 12:40 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-05 08:47 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 14:53 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 09:05 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-05 17:12 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-05 18:33 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-06 08:54 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-06 11:50 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-06 10:59 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-06 07:54 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-06 16:57 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-06 10:20 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-07-05 12:37 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Gerard Schildberger <gerard46@rrt.net> - 2016-07-05 13:51 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:12 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-05 16:35 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-07-05 11:21 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:33 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-05 16:38 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-05 17:39 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-07-05 17:26 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 20:46 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-06 09:00 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:29 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-04 12:42 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Elliott Roper <nospam@yrl.co.uk> - 2016-07-04 22:25 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust sidd@situ.com (sidd) - 2016-07-05 01:07 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Elliott Roper <nospam@yrl.co.uk> - 2016-07-05 12:54 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-05 08:47 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-05 16:40 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 18:24 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-06 08:50 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:16 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-05 17:16 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-05 23:21 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-06 08:52 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-06 11:44 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-06 07:54 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-06 16:51 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust sidd@situ.com (sidd) - 2016-07-06 00:18 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2016-07-06 08:46 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-06 11:42 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Elliott Roper <nospam@yrl.co.uk> - 2016-07-06 12:51 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-07-05 12:49 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-06 13:11 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-06 19:17 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-07-06 15:12 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-07 01:59 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-07 12:52 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-08 03:51 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-08 12:18 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-08 09:33 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-08 15:16 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-08 10:56 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-07-08 14:20 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-08 19:57 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-09 14:18 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-09 13:05 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-10 12:06 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-10 17:32 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-10 19:30 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-07-10 18:43 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust pechter@pechter.net (William Pechter) - 2016-07-12 18:56 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-09 13:04 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-09 13:00 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-07-09 18:33 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-09 22:08 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-09 14:18 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-09 12:38 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Bernd Felsche <berfel@innovative.iinet.net.au> - 2016-07-11 14:09 +0800
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-08 16:25 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-09 14:18 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-09 17:17 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-09 12:41 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-09 18:49 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-09 21:38 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-07-10 09:39 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-10 09:55 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-07-10 07:04 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-10 17:05 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-11 04:02 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-11 07:55 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-09 12:39 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-09 13:43 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-09 20:02 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-07-11 21:19 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-12 07:17 +0100
Insulation - was Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-07-12 09:42 +0100
Re: Insulation - was Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-12 16:01 +0100
Re: Insulation - was Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-07-12 09:41 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-07-09 20:42 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-07-10 09:38 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-11 16:39 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-11 16:52 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-11 12:50 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-08 19:51 -0400
Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Jack Myers" <jmyers@n6wuz.net> - 2016-07-08 22:05 -0700
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-09 07:00 -0400
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-09 14:18 +0000
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-09 11:12 -0400
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-09 12:35 -0500
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-07-09 18:08 -0700
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-09 22:09 -0400
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-07-09 21:05 -0700
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-10 12:06 +0000
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust pechter@pechter.net (William Pechter) - 2016-07-12 18:39 +0000
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-13 12:48 +0000
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-10 12:06 +0000
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-07-10 07:01 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-09 14:18 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-09 10:51 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-02 16:50 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-02 16:08 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-02 22:27 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 19:22 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 16:18 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-03 13:33 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:20 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-05 11:39 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 12:24 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-07-05 12:51 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-05 13:28 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 14:57 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-05 11:36 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 17:12 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-07-05 17:03 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-06 08:47 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-06 11:04 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-06 19:13 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-06 20:47 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-06 17:18 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-07 07:57 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> - 2016-07-10 11:33 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-10 17:23 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-07 02:15 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-05 11:30 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-05 18:42 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-05 19:42 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-06 02:21 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-07-05 21:29 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-06 11:31 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-06 07:50 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-06 10:24 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-02 12:27 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-07-02 17:05 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2016-07-02 19:34 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-02 20:28 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-07-02 22:20 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 13:28 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-02 16:08 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 19:16 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-05 11:37 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-05 15:34 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-05 13:36 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-05 09:55 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 20:43 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-02 19:35 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-03 07:11 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-03 11:39 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-07-03 18:03 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-03 08:38 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-03 06:17 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-07-03 09:46 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-03 08:13 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-03 11:35 -0400
Trump - was: Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-07-04 21:45 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-07-03 15:20 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-01 13:02 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-30 20:23 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-01 13:24 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-01 20:50 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-30 13:14 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-30 07:04 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-30 18:16 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-30 22:45 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-30 06:46 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2016-06-30 15:34 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-30 13:16 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-06-30 17:40 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-30 20:16 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-01 11:30 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-01 13:05 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-30 20:16 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-01 13:22 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-30 18:13 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-29 16:07 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-29 10:06 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-29 12:29 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-29 12:26 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-29 07:27 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-29 12:30 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-29 12:52 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-29 14:05 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-29 15:07 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-29 16:08 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-29 17:00 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-29 16:51 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-29 18:41 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-29 19:37 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-30 12:53 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-30 18:18 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-30 14:05 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-01 07:47 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> - 2016-07-02 06:54 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-29 15:37 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-29 16:51 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-29 17:13 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-29 12:13 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-01 08:38 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-25 11:28 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-25 12:43 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust maus <mausg@mail.com> - 2016-06-25 11:59 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-25 16:10 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-25 14:12 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-25 08:52 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-25 16:11 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-25 12:36 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-25 14:06 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-25 01:17 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-06-24 21:09 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-25 07:31 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust maus <mausg@mail.com> - 2016-06-25 12:11 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-25 17:39 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-26 04:05 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-24 09:57 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-24 22:50 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-25 11:59 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-23 10:01 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 09:09 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-23 09:48 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-23 10:01 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-21 10:58 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-21 08:12 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-21 14:41 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-22 12:47 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 09:43 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-22 12:17 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-21 11:30 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-21 14:35 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-21 18:08 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-21 19:56 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 14:04 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 21:39 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-22 08:58 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 17:34 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 13:49 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-22 21:57 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 04:29 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-23 11:26 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-06-22 00:13 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-21 14:08 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-22 08:52 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 14:11 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-23 00:46 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-22 12:47 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 09:47 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-22 19:20 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-23 13:08 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 09:13 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-22 12:17 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 14:37 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-23 13:08 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-06-22 09:19 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 14:26 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-22 16:23 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-22 12:17 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-22 22:02 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 14:35 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-23 00:46 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-06-21 01:06 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 04:12 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-21 11:32 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-21 11:00 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-21 17:40 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-21 16:18 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-21 16:29 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 20:13 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 21:14 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-21 20:49 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-06-21 12:49 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-21 16:27 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-21 14:37 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-21 06:34 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Alfred Falk <falk@arc.ab.ca> - 2016-06-21 20:12 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-21 10:15 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-21 06:44 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-21 15:41 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-21 08:07 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-21 11:30 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-21 17:35 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-06-21 12:46 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-21 16:27 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Alfred Falk <falk@arc.ab.ca> - 2016-06-22 22:35 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 21:11 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-22 09:04 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 09:39 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-22 12:17 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 14:07 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-22 15:57 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 21:34 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 09:14 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-01 20:06 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-21 11:30 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-21 14:25 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 19:46 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 18:47 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-22 09:02 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 09:37 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-22 16:35 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 14:05 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-23 00:46 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 21:47 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-22 21:21 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-22 20:55 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 14:30 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-23 06:01 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 14:25 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 14:15 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-23 13:07 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-23 14:15 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 10:29 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-23 11:33 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-23 15:57 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-23 13:50 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-23 15:55 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-23 20:33 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-24 06:46 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-24 12:03 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-24 11:54 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-24 16:08 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-24 14:39 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-24 17:48 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-06-24 07:18 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-24 12:21 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-24 10:10 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-24 09:32 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-24 11:03 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-24 22:51 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-25 13:10 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-24 16:30 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-24 09:51 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-24 22:47 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-06-24 22:02 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-25 10:18 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-23 18:50 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-24 12:39 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-24 15:41 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-24 19:49 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-25 08:58 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-24 11:40 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 17:37 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-21 06:54 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-21 10:57 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-21 06:49 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-21 14:33 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-21 18:05 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 20:07 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-21 22:37 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 04:31 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 14:02 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 13:47 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-23 00:46 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-23 06:42 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-23 05:59 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 04:31 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 09:12 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-06-23 11:11 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-23 07:39 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-21 14:13 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-16 13:12 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-16 21:39 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-16 14:37 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-16 19:35 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-16 13:02 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-16 14:51 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-16 13:06 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-17 03:38 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-17 08:07 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-17 14:34 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-18 13:00 +0000
Page 1 of 27 [1] 2 3 … 27 Next page →
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-15 13:22 -0700 |
| Subject | "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust |
| Message-ID | <fafa7d9d-4bd1-4526-a14b-5c4a57075ac0@googlegroups.com> |
There are about 20 years worth of issues of C&A on bitsavers. Interesting reading, including the ads and photos. Toward the end of the run, the magazine changed its name to Computers & People, and began to take a kind of anti- establishment thrust. At the same time, advertising dried up. (I don't know if the two are related, nor which happened first.) One thing was a long running series on the Vietnam War. It basically was a rambling series of accusations about the lies. (I think the lies were the worst and most critical around 1962-1963; while by 1970 everyone in the country knew the war was a big mess*.) Another thing that was actually wrong were a series of diatribes against the Bell System. The authors falsely accused the Bell System of offering no progress in business systems as well as high rates because of their monopoly status. The reality was completely different. (Technological improvements allowed long distance rates to be lowered, and local rates went up much lower than the rate of inflation. Also, Bell Labs continually developed new products for business.) The authors ignored the fact that Bell was tightly regulated-- their profits and lines of business were strictly proscribed by the FCC and state regulators**. They also claimed Bell's ownership of Western Electric resulted in higher pricing due to sole sourcing. This was false. W/E had been repeatedly and extensively audited over the years by regulators and the prices charged for equipment were fair. In addition, W/E was not a 'sole source' maker, but rather a buyer, and it acted as a volume purchaser and tester, buying a variety of products in the open market for Bell System use. The magazine also ran diatribes against IBM, falsely claiming it was a monopoly and exploiting its monopoly power to the detriment of the DP industry. It must be noted that the Feds sued IBM but lost their case. In the early 1960s, well before these articles, IBM revised a lot of its policies, unbundling much of its products. This unbundling allowed a huge growth in competitors and support companies. During that time frame, IBM lowered the price of some of its peripherals in response to competitive pressures. Unfortunately, the competing companies were unable to meet IBM's new price and got into trouble. They sued under anti-trust. The judge threw it out, noting that IBM's price reduction was totally fair and legal, plus, was exactly was competition was supposed to do. The C&A articles complained about IBM's action. The C&A articles also defined the computer market in very narrow terms, ignoring the explosive growth in mini-computers in which IBM was only a small player. * A good to read on the Vietnam War is "The Best & The Brightest" by Haberstram. I used to think General Maxwell Taylor was a big hero, but apparently not. In the early 1960s, when the US was getting more and more involved, the military flat out lied claiming things were going wonderfully when in fact things were going horribly. Had Kennedy known the real truth and if he had the guts to ask the tough questions, the US involvement would've been cut short run then. ** The anti Bell folks won. Today, Verizon is not regulated and a "competitive" company. This means they don't bother repairing landline phones unless there's a profit in it for them. If a sick elderly person is without phone service because their landline is bad (and I know some in that position), so it goes, it's not Verizon's problem.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-16 12:30 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM0005356433E8E6AB@aca40726.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #165259 |
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > There are about 20 years worth of issues of C&A on bitsavers. > Interesting reading, including the ads and photos. > > Toward the end of the run, the magazine changed its name > to Computers & People, and began to take a kind of anti- > establishment thrust. At the same time, advertising > dried up. (I don't know if the two are related, nor which > happened first.) > > One thing was a long running series on the Vietnam War. > It basically was a rambling series of accusations about > the lies. (I think the lies were the worst and most > critical around 1962-1963; while by 1970 everyone > in the country knew the war was a big mess*.) > > Another thing that was actually wrong were a series of > diatribes against the Bell System. The authors falsely > accused the Bell System of offering no progress in business > systems as well as high rates because of their monopoly status. > The reality was completely different. (Technological > improvements allowed long distance rates to be lowered, and > local rates went up much lower than the rate of inflation. > Also, Bell Labs continually developed new products for business.) > > The authors ignored the fact that Bell was tightly regulated-- > their profits and lines of business were strictly proscribed > by the FCC and state regulators**. > > They also claimed Bell's ownership of Western Electric resulted > in higher pricing due to sole sourcing. This was false. W/E > had been repeatedly and extensively audited over the years by > regulators and the prices charged for equipment were fair. In > addition, W/E was not a 'sole source' maker, but rather a buyer, > and it acted as a volume purchaser and tester, buying a variety > of products in the open market for Bell System use. > > > The magazine also ran diatribes against IBM, falsely claiming > it was a monopoly and exploiting its monopoly power to the > detriment of the DP industry. It must be noted that the Feds > sued IBM but lost their case. In the early 1960s, well before > these articles, IBM revised a lot of its policies, unbundling > much of its products. This unbundling allowed a huge growth > in competitors and support companies. > > During that time frame, IBM lowered the price of some of its > peripherals in response to competitive pressures. Unfortunately, > the competing companies were unable to meet IBM's new price and > got into trouble. They sued under anti-trust. The judge > threw it out, noting that IBM's price reduction was totally > fair and legal, plus, was exactly was competition was supposed > to do. The C&A articles complained about IBM's action. > > The C&A articles also defined the computer market in very > narrow terms, ignoring the explosive growth in mini-computers > in which IBM was only a small player. > > > * A good to read on the Vietnam War is "The Best & The Brightest" > by Haberstram. I used to think General Maxwell Taylor was a big > hero, but apparently not. In the early 1960s, when the US was > getting more and more involved, the military flat out lied > claiming things were going wonderfully when in fact things were > going horribly. Had Kennedy known the real truth and if he had > the guts to ask the tough questions, the US involvement would've > been cut short run then. > > > ** The anti Bell folks won. Today, Verizon is not regulated > and a "competitive" company. This means they don't bother > repairing landline phones unless there's a profit in it for > them. If a sick elderly person is without phone service > because their landline is bad (and I know some in that > position), so it goes, it's not Verizon's problem. Part of the problem is that the infrastructure got wiped out by the hurricane Sandy. Verizon doesn't want to restore the old copper infrastructure but regs and other polictics are making a mess of any attempt to restore comm service. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-16 13:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3a858268-6020-4dee-9bdc-049dd188611c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #165299 |
On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 8:31:07 AM UTC-4, jmfbahciv wrote: > Part of the problem is that the infrastructure got wiped out > by the hurricane Sandy. Verizon doesn't want to restore > the old copper infrastructure but regs and other polictics > are making a mess of any attempt to restore comm service. Verizon has ceased copper support in areas that had no impact from Sandy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-17 04:21 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.31cd7d0bbe0b9f1a98a27e@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #165331 |
In article <3a858268-6020-4dee-9bdc-049dd188611c@googlegroups.com>, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com says... > > On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 8:31:07 AM UTC-4, jmfbahciv wrote: > > > Part of the problem is that the infrastructure got wiped out > > by the hurricane Sandy. Verizon doesn't want to restore > > the old copper infrastructure but regs and other polictics > > are making a mess of any attempt to restore comm service. > > Verizon has ceased copper support in areas that had no impact > from Sandy. So has AT&T. Around here they sold most of their copper to "Frontier" and I suspect that it's going to be a cold day in Hell before there's fiber anywhere near here.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | pechter@pechter.net (William Pechter) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-18 18:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nk45hr$ums$1@pechter.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #165299 |
In article <PM0005356433E8E6AB@aca40726.ipt.aol.com>, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >> There are about 20 years worth of issues of C&A on bitsavers. >> Interesting reading, including the ads and photos. >> >> Toward the end of the run, the magazine changed its name >> to Computers & People, and began to take a kind of anti- >> establishment thrust. At the same time, advertising >> dried up. (I don't know if the two are related, nor which >> happened first.) >> >> One thing was a long running series on the Vietnam War. >> It basically was a rambling series of accusations about >> the lies. (I think the lies were the worst and most >> critical around 1962-1963; while by 1970 everyone >> in the country knew the war was a big mess*.) >> >> Another thing that was actually wrong were a series of >> diatribes against the Bell System. The authors falsely >> accused the Bell System of offering no progress in business >> systems as well as high rates because of their monopoly status. >> The reality was completely different. (Technological >> improvements allowed long distance rates to be lowered, and >> local rates went up much lower than the rate of inflation. >> Also, Bell Labs continually developed new products for business.) >> >> The authors ignored the fact that Bell was tightly regulated-- >> their profits and lines of business were strictly proscribed >> by the FCC and state regulators**. >> >> They also claimed Bell's ownership of Western Electric resulted >> in higher pricing due to sole sourcing. This was false. W/E >> had been repeatedly and extensively audited over the years by >> regulators and the prices charged for equipment were fair. In >> addition, W/E was not a 'sole source' maker, but rather a buyer, >> and it acted as a volume purchaser and tester, buying a variety >> of products in the open market for Bell System use. >> >> >> The magazine also ran diatribes against IBM, falsely claiming >> it was a monopoly and exploiting its monopoly power to the >> detriment of the DP industry. It must be noted that the Feds >> sued IBM but lost their case. In the early 1960s, well before >> these articles, IBM revised a lot of its policies, unbundling >> much of its products. This unbundling allowed a huge growth >> in competitors and support companies. >> >> During that time frame, IBM lowered the price of some of its >> peripherals in response to competitive pressures. Unfortunately, >> the competing companies were unable to meet IBM's new price and >> got into trouble. They sued under anti-trust. The judge >> threw it out, noting that IBM's price reduction was totally >> fair and legal, plus, was exactly was competition was supposed >> to do. The C&A articles complained about IBM's action. >> >> The C&A articles also defined the computer market in very >> narrow terms, ignoring the explosive growth in mini-computers >> in which IBM was only a small player. >> >> >> * A good to read on the Vietnam War is "The Best & The Brightest" >> by Haberstram. I used to think General Maxwell Taylor was a big >> hero, but apparently not. In the early 1960s, when the US was >> getting more and more involved, the military flat out lied >> claiming things were going wonderfully when in fact things were >> going horribly. Had Kennedy known the real truth and if he had >> the guts to ask the tough questions, the US involvement would've >> been cut short run then. >> >> >> ** The anti Bell folks won. Today, Verizon is not regulated >> and a "competitive" company. This means they don't bother >> repairing landline phones unless there's a profit in it for >> them. If a sick elderly person is without phone service >> because their landline is bad (and I know some in that >> position), so it goes, it's not Verizon's problem. > >Part of the problem is that the infrastructure got wiped out >by the hurricane Sandy. Verizon doesn't want to restore >the old copper infrastructure but regs and other polictics >are making a mess of any attempt to restore comm service. > >/BAH Even before Sandy Verizon was pulling the copper when they put fiber to the house for Fios. Nothing like using the expensive upgrade to guarantee you will have difficulty reverting if you want to cut the bills. Anything to get out from under regulation. As far as Sandy, in my local area there was more power company damage through flooding of substations than there was phone issues due to winds. We had no power for 13 days. Not fun. Monmouth County was pretty heavily hit by Sandy. I'm 3 miles from Union Beach which was a pretty heavily hit town. Houses still are being raised up 4+ feet and rebuilt. The place where the phones were washed out was near Brielle and Manasquan, IIRC. The sandbar in the area was split into two islands by the tidal surge. Verizon didn't want to put in new phone lines and offered a wireless alternative. They really want to kill landlines and push to unregulated and expensive cell use. Bill -- -- Digital had it then. Don't you wish you could buy it now! pechter-at-gmail.com http://xkcd.com/705/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-19 13:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM000535A1AB251BF2@aca400e1.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #165540 |
William Pechter wrote: > In article <PM0005356433E8E6AB@aca40726.ipt.aol.com>, > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >>> There are about 20 years worth of issues of C&A on bitsavers. >>> Interesting reading, including the ads and photos. >>> >>> Toward the end of the run, the magazine changed its name >>> to Computers & People, and began to take a kind of anti- >>> establishment thrust. At the same time, advertising >>> dried up. (I don't know if the two are related, nor which >>> happened first.) >>> >>> One thing was a long running series on the Vietnam War. >>> It basically was a rambling series of accusations about >>> the lies. (I think the lies were the worst and most >>> critical around 1962-1963; while by 1970 everyone >>> in the country knew the war was a big mess*.) >>> >>> Another thing that was actually wrong were a series of >>> diatribes against the Bell System. The authors falsely >>> accused the Bell System of offering no progress in business >>> systems as well as high rates because of their monopoly status. >>> The reality was completely different. (Technological >>> improvements allowed long distance rates to be lowered, and >>> local rates went up much lower than the rate of inflation. >>> Also, Bell Labs continually developed new products for business.) >>> >>> The authors ignored the fact that Bell was tightly regulated-- >>> their profits and lines of business were strictly proscribed >>> by the FCC and state regulators**. >>> >>> They also claimed Bell's ownership of Western Electric resulted >>> in higher pricing due to sole sourcing. This was false. W/E >>> had been repeatedly and extensively audited over the years by >>> regulators and the prices charged for equipment were fair. In >>> addition, W/E was not a 'sole source' maker, but rather a buyer, >>> and it acted as a volume purchaser and tester, buying a variety >>> of products in the open market for Bell System use. >>> >>> >>> The magazine also ran diatribes against IBM, falsely claiming >>> it was a monopoly and exploiting its monopoly power to the >>> detriment of the DP industry. It must be noted that the Feds >>> sued IBM but lost their case. In the early 1960s, well before >>> these articles, IBM revised a lot of its policies, unbundling >>> much of its products. This unbundling allowed a huge growth >>> in competitors and support companies. >>> >>> During that time frame, IBM lowered the price of some of its >>> peripherals in response to competitive pressures. Unfortunately, >>> the competing companies were unable to meet IBM's new price and >>> got into trouble. They sued under anti-trust. The judge >>> threw it out, noting that IBM's price reduction was totally >>> fair and legal, plus, was exactly was competition was supposed >>> to do. The C&A articles complained about IBM's action. >>> >>> The C&A articles also defined the computer market in very >>> narrow terms, ignoring the explosive growth in mini-computers >>> in which IBM was only a small player. >>> >>> >>> * A good to read on the Vietnam War is "The Best & The Brightest" >>> by Haberstram. I used to think General Maxwell Taylor was a big >>> hero, but apparently not. In the early 1960s, when the US was >>> getting more and more involved, the military flat out lied >>> claiming things were going wonderfully when in fact things were >>> going horribly. Had Kennedy known the real truth and if he had >>> the guts to ask the tough questions, the US involvement would've >>> been cut short run then. >>> >>> >>> ** The anti Bell folks won. Today, Verizon is not regulated >>> and a "competitive" company. This means they don't bother >>> repairing landline phones unless there's a profit in it for >>> them. If a sick elderly person is without phone service >>> because their landline is bad (and I know some in that >>> position), so it goes, it's not Verizon's problem. >> >>Part of the problem is that the infrastructure got wiped out >>by the hurricane Sandy. Verizon doesn't want to restore >>the old copper infrastructure but regs and other polictics >>are making a mess of any attempt to restore comm service. >> >>/BAH > > Even before Sandy Verizon was pulling the copper when they put fiber to the > house for Fios. Nothing like using the expensive upgrade to guarantee you > will have difficulty reverting if you want to cut the bills. > > Anything to get out from under regulation. > > As far as Sandy, in my local area there was more power company damage through > flooding of substations than there was phone issues due to winds. > > We had no power for 13 days. Not fun. Yea, I know. > > Monmouth County was pretty heavily hit by Sandy. I'm 3 miles from Union > Beach which was a pretty heavily hit town. Houses still are being raised > up 4+ feet and rebuilt. A friend's neighbor just finished last winter. > The place where the phones were washed out was near > Brielle and Manasquan, IIRC. The sandbar in the area was split into two > islands by the tidal surge. Verizon didn't want to put in new phone lines > and offered a wireless alternative. But doesn't wireless require a wire? > > They really want to kill landlines and push to unregulated and expensive > cell use. it will only be a matter of time before cell use will get regulated. I was also told that another wrinkle is that medical devices require coopper wire for comm which I don't understand at all. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-19 16:59 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <20160619165929.35b623868c79931983636c47@eircom.net> |
| In reply to | #165579 |
On 19 Jun 2016 13:31:54 GMT jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: > William Pechter wrote: > > The place where the phones were washed out was near > > Brielle and Manasquan, IIRC. The sandbar in the area was split into two > > islands by the tidal surge. Verizon didn't want to put in new phone > > lines and offered a wireless alternative. > > But doesn't wireless require a wire? When most people talk about wireless networking they mean wifi, 2.4GHz or 5GHz usually short range broadcast but can be used tight beam for long range point to point links, and tight beam at one end to high power and GBFO sector aerial at the other to provide a wide area service. When service providers talk about wireless services they tend to mean either the latter kind of wifi (one of our local ISPs does this at 5GHz using Ubiquiti gear) or something similar using a different protocol, another of ours uses DOCSIS over a licensed carrier and yet another uses LTE TDD over a licensed carrier. In each case there is typically a mast serving an area perhaps roughly thirty miles in diameter and customers have a small dish or flat plate aeriel pointing at it (usually with all the RF electronics built into the box). Latency is up a bit over wire or fibre, and bandwidth tends to depend on protocol and signal quality. My current provider uses LTE TDD and provides 70Mb down, 6 up (they refuse to connect if they can't get at least 30Mbit down), my previous one only managed 6 down 1 up using DOCSIS. I presume there's a fibre connection to the tower with a *lot* of bandwidth but the only wire at this end is the power (and my internal wiring). -- Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-22 16:41 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <PLadnf-yK7ZTmPbKnZ2dnUU7-bOdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #165582 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote: > My current provider uses LTE TDD and provides 70Mb down, 6 up Groan! My business-class cable modem gives 100 Mb down and only 4 up, I'd much rather have a more up even at the expense of some of the download speed. I'd love even 6 Mb up! Jon
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-16 07:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f416103f-0725-483f-ad2c-442e5009bfad@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #165259 |
On Wednesday, June 15, 2016 at 2:22:47 PM UTC-6, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > Toward the end of the run, the magazine changed its name > to Computers & People, and began to take a kind of anti- > establishment thrust. At the same time, advertising > dried up. (I don't know if the two are related, nor which > happened first.) Earlier on, a few articles claiming there was a conspiracy in the Kennedy assassination had appeared in it. That the anti-establishment articles would lead to many advertisers in so sober and strait-laced a field as data processing withdrawing from the publication is so obvious it had not occurred to me to doubt that this was the sequence of events, or to give the slightest consideration to any alternative possible explanations. I view the sad fate of that publication as a tragedy, the needless loss of a publication that could have continued to contribute to the field with the more moderate positive view of how computers could be used for the benefit of humanity that had informed it from the start. (That is, even from the beginning, there was a bit of "People's Computer Company"-like progressivism visible in the magazine's editorial policy.) Of course, the fact that its publisher was responsible for the great Bryak-Colu continuity mixup somewhat clouds my regard for him. John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-16 08:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e3891e01-5b56-4af6-b501-be7cf47433a9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #165311 |
On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 8:58:25 AM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote: > (That is, even from the > beginning, there was a bit of "People's Computer Company"-like progressivism > visible in the magazine's editorial policy.) For example, one might look at the November 1957 issue, which has an article about the launch of Sputnik, to see a response that was somewhat atypical for the period. In May 1961, they carried an article by C. P. Snow on "The Moral Un-Neutrality of Science" accompanied by an editorial about the social responsibilities of computer people - connected with the ACM addressing that issue. In March 1967, there was an article entitled "A Vietnam Peace Game", about using computer simulation to help solve issues in international relations. So the seeds were there before the debacle at the end. John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Al Kossow <aek@bitsavers.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-16 10:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <njuo7l$o3e$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #165311 |
On 6/16/16 7:58 AM, Quadibloc wrote: > Of course, the fact that its publisher was responsible for the great Bryak-Colu > continuity mixup somewhat clouds my regard for him. > > John Savard > Could you elaborate on this? One of the reasons I've put as much of C&A on line as I could find was that Edmund Berkeley seems to have been pretty much written out of the history of computing because of his political opinions at the end of his life, and the brouhaha he caused at the ACM 50th anniversary.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Al Kossow <aek@bitsavers.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-16 10:44 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <njuohh$ouj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #165323 |
On 6/16/16 10:38 AM, Al Kossow wrote: > the ACM 50th anniversary. > 25th, he died in 1988
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Al Kossow <aek@bitsavers.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-16 10:46 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <njuokr$ouj$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #165324 |
On 6/16/16 10:44 AM, Al Kossow wrote: > On 6/16/16 10:38 AM, Al Kossow wrote: >> the ACM 50th anniversary. >> > 25th, he died in 1988 > > http://history.computer.org/pioneers/berkeley.html In 1972 ACM honored Berkeley as its singular founder at its 25th anniversary dinner. His acceptance speech was a direct denunciation of those in computing who worked on the killing devices used in the Vietnam War, or computing companies that made such horrors, and of ACM for ignoring this immorality. He said that it was a "gross neglect of responsibility" that ACM was not investigating whether computer applications were good or evil and how computers could be used to increase the good of society. Several prominent ACM members, employees of the firms and government military agencies that Berkeley had pointed to, ostentatiously walked out of the banquet room while he was speaking. The leaders of ACM were clearly embarrassed by their honoree, and ACM never publicly referred to his speech in any way.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-16 13:27 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ebe0037d-f420-48d5-9b6e-a0c5900ca9ca@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #165325 |
On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 1:46:04 PM UTC-4, Al Kossow wrote: > On 6/16/16 10:44 AM, Al Kossow wrote: > > On 6/16/16 10:38 AM, Al Kossow wrote: > >> the ACM 50th anniversary. > >> > > 25th, he died in 1988 > > > > > http://history.computer.org/pioneers/berkeley.html > > In 1972 ACM honored Berkeley as its singular founder at its 25th anniversary dinner. His acceptance speech was a direct > denunciation of those in computing who worked on the killing devices used in the Vietnam War, or computing companies > that made such horrors, and of ACM for ignoring this immorality. He said that it was a "gross neglect of responsibility" > that ACM was not investigating whether computer applications were good or evil and how computers could be used to > increase the good of society. Several prominent ACM members, employees of the firms and government military agencies > that Berkeley had pointed to, ostentatiously walked out of the banquet room while he was speaking. The leaders of ACM > were clearly embarrassed by their honoree, and ACM never publicly referred to his speech in any way. Wow. Lately, I've been reading about the Vietnam War, especially the early years. As mentioned, I recommend Haberstram's "The Best and the Brightest". Anyway, the defense business certainly did make a ton of money off the war. However, I do not hold them accountable for it. The government asked them to do a job, and they did it. I blame the high-ups in government, the people who had access to the facts and deliberately hid them from the people. This would include McNamara, Gen. Paul Harkins, Gen. Maxwell Taylor, LBJ, and JFK, among others.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-16 19:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87porg1s95.fsf@garlic.com> |
| In reply to | #165335 |
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes: > Lately, I've been reading about the Vietnam War, especially the > early years. As mentioned, I recommend Haberstram's "The Best > and the Brightest". > > Anyway, the defense business certainly did make a ton of money > off the war. However, I do not hold them accountable for it. > The government asked them to do a job, and they did it. > > I blame the high-ups in government, the people who had access > to the facts and deliberately hid them from the people. This would > include McNamara, Gen. Paul Harkins, Gen. Maxwell Taylor, LBJ, > and JFK, among others. mcnamara was LaMay's staff planning the fire bombing of half dozen german cities and then fire bombing 67 japanese cities (years later in interview, he quotes lamay as saying if US had lost the war, they would have been prosecuted for war crimes). after ww2, mcnamara leaves for auto industry but comes back as SECDEF for vietnam ... where Laos becomes most bombed country in the world http://legaciesofwar.org/about-laos/secret-war-laos/ http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/03/laos-vietnam-war-us-bombing-uxo ... recent posts http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016.html#60 For those who like to regress to their youth? :-) http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#8 What Does School Really Teach Children http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#30 AM radio Qbasic some of the special forces accounts have their strategy of pacification working ... but that westmoreland stepped in and wanted big traditional military battles ... justifying regular army promotions for his buddies. As undergraduate, I was fulltime at the Univ. responsible for the IBM production systems. The last summer, I was hired as fulltime employee helping form Boeing Computer Services (consolidate all dataprocessing in an independent business unit to monetize the investment). Later I got to know John Boyd and sponsored his briefings at IBM. Boyd's bios has him in command of "spook base" about the same time I was at Boeing ... and "spook base" was a $2.5B "windfall" for IBM (in 1970 dollars). Boyd said that he was strong/vocal opponent of the sensors across the trail as not working ... so being put in charge of "spook base" may have been punishment. reference to "spook base" ... gone 404, lives on at "wayback" machine: http://web.archive.org/web/20030212092342/http://home.att.net/~c.jeppeson/igloo_white.html note, above has some of the planes at "spook base" fitted out as drones ... capable of being flown w/o human on board. posts & web URLs referencing Boyd http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/subboyd.html -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mausg@mail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-17 12:51 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnnm7p29.1mq.mausg@Smaus.org> |
| In reply to | #165360 |
On 2016-06-17, Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> wrote: > hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes: >> Lately, I've been reading about the Vietnam War, especially the >> early years. As mentioned, I recommend Haberstram's "The Best >> and the Brightest". >> > working ... but that westmoreland stepped in and wanted big traditional > military battles ... justifying regular army promotions for his buddies. > > As undergraduate, I was fulltime at the Univ. responsible for the IBM > production systems. The last summer, I was hired as fulltime employee > helping form Boeing Computer Services (consolidate all dataprocessing in > an independent business unit to monetize the investment). Later I got to > know John Boyd and sponsored his briefings at IBM. Boyd's bios has him > in command of "spook base" about the same time I was at Boeing ... and > "spook base" was a $2.5B "windfall" for IBM (in 1970 dollars). Boyd > said that he was strong/vocal opponent of the sensors across the trail > as not working ... so being put in charge of "spook base" may have > been punishment. reference to "spook base" ... gone 404, lives on at > "wayback" machine: > http://web.archive.org/web/20030212092342/http://home.att.net/~c.jeppeson/igloo_white.html > As am aside on the Vietnam War, my son backpacked through some of Laos and Cambodia some years ago, mostly by local bus, in large parts the bus would have an armed guard, as the mountain tribes, suborned by the CIA during the Vietnam war, are still `anti-government' and alienated from the general society. He said that there were some Americans around, living a drugindused existance. That would be, uh, 10 years ago or so. I remember the stories of how computers were helping win that war, there was an idea of an 'oil-stain' graphics output, the computers would plot areas with cdolouring showing the places that had been cleared of Vietcong, areas that were being cleared, etc, and a series of these maps would show the progress. Utter rubbish, of course. -- greymaus.ireland.ie . . ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-17 14:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e834351c-4990-4788-923b-0ee9997a9f87@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #165360 |
On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 10:08:57 PM UTC-4, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: > mcnamara was LaMay's staff planning the fire bombing of half dozen > german cities and then fire bombing 67 japanese cities (years later in > interview, he quotes lamay as saying if US had lost the war, they would > have been prosecuted for war crimes). after ww2, mcnamara leaves for > auto industry but comes back as SECDEF for vietnam ... where Laos > becomes most bombed country in the world Yes, LaMay in his memoir clearly says he would've been tried for war crimes for the firebombing raids. He too sat down and figured out how to make the raids as destructive as possible, as well as keeping the crews safe. He still defends his actions, saying it was war and they had to defeat the enemy by the means available. As mentioned, the US air corps passionately believed in the value of strategic bombing in WW II. How effective it actually was in shortening the war (by making it harder for the enemy to fight) is tough to say. Sadly, such bombing of both Japan and Germany killed a lot of people, but since both were cruel dictatorships, it made no difference to the leaders. I do wonder if the Allies bombed things like oil refineries and steel mills, which should've been prominent targets as well as critical to the war effect. The flip side is that the enemy had aggressive anti-aircraft defenses, and some raids were very costly in terms of air crews.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mausg@mail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-17 21:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnnm8mvs.1ln.mausg@Smaus.org> |
| In reply to | #165433 |
On 2016-06-17, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: > On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 10:08:57 PM UTC-4, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: > > >> mcnamara was LaMay's staff planning the fire bombing of half dozen >> german cities and then fire bombing 67 japanese cities (years later in >> interview, he quotes lamay as saying if US had lost the war, they would >> have been prosecuted for war crimes). after ww2, mcnamara leaves for >> auto industry but comes back as SECDEF for vietnam ... where Laos >> becomes most bombed country in the world > > Yes, LaMay in his memoir clearly says he would've been tried > for war crimes for the firebombing raids. He too sat down and > figured out how to make the raids as destructive as possible, as > well as keeping the crews safe. > > He still defends his actions, saying it was war and they had to > defeat the enemy by the means available. > > As mentioned, the US air corps passionately believed in the value > of strategic bombing in WW II. How effective it actually was in > shortening the war (by making it harder for the enemy to fight) > is tough to say. > > Sadly, such bombing of both Japan and Germany killed a lot of people, > but since both were cruel dictatorships, it made no difference to the > leaders. > > I do wonder if the Allies bombed things like oil refineries and > steel mills, which should've been prominent targets as well as > critical to the war effect. > > The flip side is that the enemy had aggressive anti-aircraft > defenses, and some raids were very costly in terms of air crews. > There were several long range raids on the Rumanian oil fields at Ploetsi(sp?) but there were large amounts of oil still going to Germany till the Soviets took over that country. As to steel mills, the raids on the Ruhr did not stop steel production. There were raids on the ball-bearing factories in Eastern Germany in 1943, the bombers flying on to Italy, for reasons of range, which resulted in heavy losses to the US bombers involved. -- greymaus.ireland.ie . . ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-17 16:47 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <q4r8mbd9u0mtbm49131rlo2f2cuiaha2p9@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #165434 |
On 17 Jun 2016 21:22:21 GMT, mausg@mail.com wrote: >On 2016-06-17, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: >> On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 10:08:57 PM UTC-4, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: >> >> >>> mcnamara was LaMay's staff planning the fire bombing of half dozen >>> german cities and then fire bombing 67 japanese cities (years later in >>> interview, he quotes lamay as saying if US had lost the war, they would >>> have been prosecuted for war crimes). after ww2, mcnamara leaves for >>> auto industry but comes back as SECDEF for vietnam ... where Laos >>> becomes most bombed country in the world >> >> Yes, LaMay in his memoir clearly says he would've been tried >> for war crimes for the firebombing raids. He too sat down and >> figured out how to make the raids as destructive as possible, as >> well as keeping the crews safe. >> >> He still defends his actions, saying it was war and they had to >> defeat the enemy by the means available. >> >> As mentioned, the US air corps passionately believed in the value >> of strategic bombing in WW II. How effective it actually was in >> shortening the war (by making it harder for the enemy to fight) >> is tough to say. >> >> Sadly, such bombing of both Japan and Germany killed a lot of people, >> but since both were cruel dictatorships, it made no difference to the >> leaders. >> >> I do wonder if the Allies bombed things like oil refineries and >> steel mills, which should've been prominent targets as well as >> critical to the war effect. >> >> The flip side is that the enemy had aggressive anti-aircraft >> defenses, and some raids were very costly in terms of air crews. >> > >There were several long range raids on the Rumanian oil fields at >Ploetsi(sp?) but there were large amounts of oil still going to Germany >till the Soviets took over that country. As to steel mills, the raids >on the Ruhr did not stop steel production. There were raids on the >ball-bearing factories in Eastern Germany in 1943, the bombers flying >on to Italy, for reasons of range, which resulted in heavy losses to >the US bombers involved. It was multiple bombing raids. One group made 7 raids on Ploiesti. http://www.roconsulboston.com/Pages/InfoPages/PloestiFrstPersn.html -- JimP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-17 23:02 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87a8ijxcds.fsf@garlic.com> |
| In reply to | #165434 |
mausg@mail.com writes: > There were several long range raids on the Rumanian oil fields at > Ploetsi(sp?) but there were large amounts of oil still going to Germany > till the Soviets took over that country. As to steel mills, the raids > on the Ruhr did not stop steel production. There were raids on the > ball-bearing factories in Eastern Germany in 1943, the bombers flying > on to Italy, for reasons of range, which resulted in heavy losses to > the US bombers involved. re: http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#82 "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust John Foster Dulles (along with others like Prescott Bush) in the 20s&30s were major force in rebuilding Germany's economy and military. From the law of unintended consequences, The US 1943 strategic bombing program needed industrial and miliary target locations in germany, they got plans and location information from wallstreet. http://www.amazon.com/Brothers-Foster-Dulles-Allen-Secret-ebook/dp/B00BY5QX1K/ loc865-68: In mid-1931 a consortium of American banks, eager to safeguard their investments in Germany, persuaded the German government to accept a loan of nearly $500 million to prevent default. Foster was their agent. His ties to the German government tightened after Hitler took power at the beginning of 1933 and appointed Foster's old friend Hjalmar Schacht as minister of economics. loc873-79: Sullivan & Cromwell floated the first American bonds issued by the giant German steelmaker and arms manufacturer Krupp A.G., extended I.G. Farben's global reach, and fought successfully to block Canada's effort to restrict the export of steel to German arms makers. loc905-7: Foster was stunned by his brother's suggestion that Sullivan & Cromwell quit Germany. Many of his clients with interests there, including not just banks but corporations like Standard Oil and General Electric, wished Sullivan & Cromwell to remain active regardless of political conditions. loc938-40: At least one other senior partner at Sullivan & Cromwell, Eustace Seligman, was equally disturbed. In October 1939, six weeks after the Nazi invasion of Poland, he took the extraordinary step of sending Foster a formal memorandum disavowing what his old friend was saying about Nazism ... snip ... US Army Air Corp insisted that all the budget went to building heavy strategic bombers, it wasn't necessary to spend any money on long range fighter escort. The British pointed out that the Americans refused to learn from the German experience in the Battle For Britain ... and would have to relearn it the hard way for themselves. One of the other problems was from 5-6miles high, it was nearly impossible to hit a target (regardless of claims for Norden sites). Towards the end, McNamara was LeMay's staff planning fire bombing German cities and later Japanese cities (difficult to miss a whole city). "The European Campaign: Its Origins and Conduct" (strategic bombers were used on Omaha), loc2582-85: The bomber preparation of Omaha Beach was a total failure, and German defenses on Omaha Beach were intact as American troops came ashore. At Utah Beach, the bombers were a little more effective because the IXth Bomber Command was using B-26 medium bombers. Wisely, in preparation for supporting the invasion, maintenance crews removed Norden bombsights from the bombers and installed the more effective low-level altitude sights. ... snip ... past posts mentioning Norden bombsights: http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2014h.html#90 Friden Flexowriter equipment series http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2014k.html#12 1950: Northrop's Digital Differential Analyzer http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2015b.html#53 IBM Data Processing Center and Pi http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2015b.html#79 past of nukes, was Future of support for telephone rotary dial ? http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2015b.html#82 past of nukes, was Future of support for telephone rotary dial ? http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2015c.html#62 past of nukes, was Future of support for telephone rotary dial ? http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2015d.html#13 Fully Restored WWII Fighter Plane Up for Auction http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2015h.html#120 For those who like to regress to their youth? :-) http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016c.html#91 Qbasic -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 27 [1] 2 3 … 27 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web