Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Precedents Could Be Set in Neidorf Trial Message-ID: <10154@accuvax.nwu.edu> Date: 26 Jul 90 19:39:37 GMT Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu Reply-To: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) Organization: Xenix Support, FICC Lines: 33 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 519, Message 2 of 13 In article <10056@accuvax.nwu.edu> TK0JUT1%NIU.BITNET@uicvm.uic.edu (jt) writes: > The term combines two separate activities > which, at the time of introduction, were hardly derogatory. PHRACK > first appeared in November, 1985, when the founders were in their > early-to-mid teens (I think the average age was about fifteen). I don't know about you, but I don't think of 1985 as being so long ago. And my opinion of phreakers and that particular type of hackers hasn't changed any in those five years. If you have that sort of spare time, how about creating some new code instead of figuring out ways to grab old stuff? > >Another thing that annoys the government and the telcos is the constant > >(and I think sick) swapping out of /f/ with /ph/ on words out of some > >misplaced reverence to the telephone network. On the other hand, I think our esteemed Moderator is way out in left field on this one. Personally, I'm sure that Neidorf must have done something worth prosecuting him for ... but if they can't find it out or prove it they should certainly not be hitting him with this bogus 911 file business. And the freedom of speech issues bring to mind the hypocritical ravings of our own {Houston Chronical}. They believe in freedom of speech ... so long as it's not in a competing medium. Peter da Silva. `-_-' +1 713 274 5180. 'U`