Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!uunet!world!bzs From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk Subject: Re: Musing on Constitutionality Message-ID: Date: 5 Sep 90 19:33:13 GMT References: <11503@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> <82778@aerospace.AERO.ORG> <11521@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> <1990Sep3.182712.2260@world.std.com> <11548@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> <11560@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> Sender: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) Organization: The World Lines: 51 In-Reply-To: spaf@cs.purdue.EDU's message of 5 Sep 90 13:53:12 GMT Look Gene, If you have something to contribute, contribute. But your persistent insipid, shallow grandstanding and attempts to draw attention to yourself as "Mr. Security" are really quite pathetic and have been a laughingstock of the Unix community for years (if not just an embarrassment.) For years now, back to and including your San Diego "ethics" seminar at USENIX, where your "brilliant" definition of ethics as "timeless" didn't last thru the first audience question, (at which point you embarrassedly backed off entirely) have been laughable and devoid of even the slightest hint that you have any background or have even read a single book in fields of ethics, law, communications law, or anything you profess about other than some technical knowledge of how networks work. Or perhaps you never understood any pages you looked at. It is astounding to me to watch you time and again make statements like there are no regular publications on networks, then get pelted with counter-examples and just say "oops, sorry..." This latest attack (on me) is typical of your total disinterest in engaging in forum or investigation of that which you are quick to jump to a podium to extemporate on. You answer facts with sarcasm, typical of the methods of a frustrated, mediocre, grandstander. In short, sir, I call you a charlatan, a quack, and a fool. Now go away. I hope I have now warned others. From: spaf@cs.purdue.EDU (Gene Spafford) >In article bzs@world.std.com (Barry >Shein) tries to draw a comparison with Soviet publication policies >and concludes with: >>Food for thought? > >Yes, and in the Soviet Union, incidents of violent crime are >significantly lower than in the US, the rate of deaths from heart >disease are much lower, and the literacy rate is higher than here. > >A second course of the same inane "food for thought." -- -Barry Shein Software Tool & Die | {xylogics,uunet}!world!bzs | bzs@world.std.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD