Subject: Cu Digest, #5.28
From: Cu-Digest ([email-masked]) <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 93 02:04 CDT

AUSTRALIA:      ftp.ee.mu.oz.au (128.250.77.2) in /pub/text/CuD.
  EUROPE:         nic.funet.fi in pub/doc/cud. (Finland)
                  ftp.warwick.ac.uk in pub/cud (United Kingdom)

Back issues also may be obtained through mailservers at:
[email-masked]   or  [email-masked]

COMPUTER UNDERGROUND DIGEST is an open forum dedicated to sharing
information among computerists and to the presentation and debate of
diverse views.  CuD material may  be reprinted for non-profit as long
as the source is cited.  Some authors do copyright their material, and
they should be contacted for reprint permission.  It is assumed that
non-personal mail to the moderators may be reprinted unless otherwise
specified.  Readers are encouraged to submit reasoned articles
relating to computer culture and communication.  Articles are
preferred to short responses.  Please avoid quoting previous posts
unless absolutely necessary.

DISCLAIMER: The views represented herein do not necessarily represent
            the views of the moderators. Digest contributors assume all
            responsibility for ensuring that articles submitted do not
            violate copyright protections.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1993 00:56:26 EDT
From: Joe Abernathy <[email-masked]>
Subject: File 1--NREN Wrap (or "Joe's Ride at the Houston Chron")

((MODERATORS' NOTE: The following is Joe Abernathy's last story for
the Houston Chronicle. We've known Joe since 1990, and have found him
a strong supporter of civil liberties in cyberspace.  As his knowledge
of the the topic has grown, so has the sophistication of his articles.
His periodic columns in The Village Voice's "Wired" section have been
consistently penetrating commentaries on law, ethics, and policy. We
wish Joe the best in his new life. Thanks Joe.))

NREN Wrap -- This is my last story for the Houston Chronicle. It is to
appear on April 4, 1993. Please feel free to redistribute it for any
non-commercial use.

    To those of you who have provided so much help these past four
years, thanks. It's been a real education. I've accepted the job of
Senior Editor-News at PC World magazine, and I'll still be writing the
Village Voice Technocracy column, so I hope you'll all stay in touch.
My new contact information is P.O. Box 572390, Houston, Texas
77257-2390, [email-masked].

   By JOE ABERNATHY
   Houston Chronicle Staff Writer

   The specters of class struggle and international economic warfare
are casting a shadow over administration hearings on how to build a
sophisticated national computer network.

   Billed as an engine of job growth, a central concern is emerging
that the "data superhigh way" promised by Vice President Al Gore and
President Bill Clinton during the campaign could produce a large
underclass of "information have-nots."

   Based on an emerging global computer net work known as the
Internet, which links up to 12 million people in more than 30 nations,
the National Research and Education Network (NREN) is a decade-long
project of former Sen.  Gore.

   Gore envisions a future in which oceans of data, including
libraries of movies, books and other creative works, would be readily
avail able to every home. In selling a $5 billion spending plan
focused on the network in 1992, Gore held forth the image of
classrooms without walls, sophisticated medical collaborations, and
globally competitive small businesses.

   "The NREN is at all odds the most important and lucrative
marketplace of the 21st century," he said in a recent statement.

   But in trying to make it work, it has become apparent that the NREN
remains in many ways a captive of its privileged institutional
heritage.  Some Americans don't even have telephone service, and many
still don't have computers with which to access the net.

     Two congressional hearings were held in late March concerning the
National Information Infrastructure, and a bill has been introduced
that would take up where Gore's 1992 High-Performance Computing Act
left off _ bringing the net to classrooms, small business and other
potentially disenfranchised Americans. Clinton's budget includes an
additional $489 million over six years for the network.

    And while the regional Bells, newspapers and other information
giants have been struggling for years over the future of the medium,
congressional insiders say that with the in creased attention, a
resolution seems likely to be found during the current session of
Congress.

    "What I think is really getting squeezed out is that there hasn't
been a genuine, public interest, bottom-up grass roots voice. It's a
huge, huge issue," said Marc Rotenberg, director of the Washington
offices of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, the
primary champion of civil rights in the new electronic medium.  "It's
about people, it's about institutions, it's about who gets to connect
and on what terms."

    Observers also fear that the rush to wield the network as an
economic weapon could produce dramatic incursions into free speech and
other civil liberties.

   "I'm very concerned that the rhetoric about national
competitiveness is transforming itself into a new cold war," said
Gary Chapman, director of CPSR's 21st Century Project in Cambridge,
Mass. "The concerns of intelligence and other federal agencies
including NASA has been to look at technology resources that are not
related to military security but to economic benefits as being things
that have to be protected by Draconian measures of security."

   Recent disciplinary actions at NASA Ames Research Center in
Northern California seem to support Chapman's concerns.

   Up to eight of the 11 scientists disciplined in December were
targeted because of their participation in politically oriented,
international discussion groups hosted on the Internet computer
network, according to documents obtained by the Houston Chronicle
under the Freedom of Information Act, along with subsequent
interviews of NASA Ames personnel.

   "Some people there were accused of dealing with foreign nationals
about non-classified technology issues," said Chapman, whose
organization also has made inquiries into the matter.  "NASA said
the U.S. has to protect its technology assets because of the global
environment of competitiveness."

   The issues are even simpler for Raymond Luh, a subcontracting
engineer fired by NASA. Luh, an American of Chinese ancestry, feels
that his career was destroyed simply because he joined in one of the
thousands of political discussions aired each day over the Internet.

    "I feel I have been gravely wronged by NASA," Luh said. "I
cannot possibly seek employment elsewhere. My reputation as a
law-abiding citizen and a hard-working researcher has been tarnished
almost beyond repair."

    NASA refused to comment on the matter.

    According to FOIA documents provided by NASA's Office of the
Inspector General, Luh was fired when "a document containing Chinese
writing was found in (Luh's computer). ... Investigation determined
that Luh's office computer held a large volume of files relating to
his efforts to promote Most Favored Nation trade status for the
People's Republic of China. ... Luh was not authorized to use his
computer for this activity."

   To Luh, however, he was only one of the chorus of voices that
joined in a fiery debate surrounding fallout from the Tiananmen Square
massacre. He wasn't trying to make policy _ he was exercising
intellectual freedom, in his spare time.

    "That's a very dangerous and disturbing kind of trend," said
Chapman. "The parallel is with the Cold War and transforming the
modes of thinking and the practices of these agencies into new forms
of control, even in the absence of militarily significant enemies.
We'll start thinking about the Japanese or whatever Pacific Rim
country you want to pick as being `enemies,' and intellectual commerce
with these people will be a matter of economic security.

    "The freedom of expression aspect of that is very critical. We
want to make sure that this is a system in which people can express
themselves freely without repercussions."

     Observers fear that Luh may be only the first such casualty as
federal agencies and special interest groups reshape the Internet into
their own model, carving up a pie estimated to be worth $3.5 trillion.

    While Gore's vision implies the construction of a high-speed,
high-tech fiber optic network, a number of counter-proposals are being
floated.

   The Electronic Frontier Foundation _ which earlier made a name for
itself with a successful court challenge to the conduct of the Secret
Service in a hacker crackdown _ is focusing on building a less
powerful, less costly network that could reach more people, more
quickly.

   "Our central concern is that we get from debate to doing
something," said Jerry Berman, EFF director.

   EFF's approach _ endorsed by Rep. Edward J. Markey, D-Mass. _ is to
build an ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network) service atop the
telephone network, making a modest level of digital computer
transmission available quickly to every home. The more sophisticated
fiber optic approach implied by Gore's NREN could be implemented as
time and money allow.

   But few voices have been heard backing ISDN.

   "The current state of the discussion is turmoil and chaos," said
the CPSR's Rotenberg. "It's a mistake to place too much emphasis on
any technological configuration. A lot of that energy and those
resources would be better spent talking about users and institutions
rather than technology and standards.

    "This is like trying to explain railroads in the 18th century or
cars in the 19th century. Here we are in the 20th century, and we know
something big is happening right under our feet and we know it has
something to do with these new telecommunications technologies.

   "None of us knows where this is going to take us, but I think
people should have some sensitivity to the prospect that the future
world we're going to live in is going to be shaped in many ways by the
decisions we make today about the information infrastructure."

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Apr 93 16:33:01 EDT
From: "W. K. (Bill) Gorman" <[email-masked]>
Subject: File 2--Clinton Proposes National ID Card

Here is a data pointer you might find of interest.

++++++++++++++++++++++++ATTACHMENT++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

[email-masked]
Subject--A national ID card - coming soon from the Clinton administration?
Date--7 Apr 93 18:52:13 GMT

This is a brief synopsis of an article in Section B, page 7, in the
Wednesday, April 7, 1993 San Jose Mercury News.  Excerpted without
permission.  All typos are mine.

Headline: Big Brother's little sibling: the smart card
Author: Martin Anderson

The article discusses work ongoing in the Clinton administration to
give everyone a "smart card" for personal medical information, to cut
down on waste, fraud, and abuse in health care.

   "But now the smart card idea may have taken an ugly turn.
   Recently, Ira Magaziner, a Uria Heepish bureaucrat in charge
   of coordinating the development of health care policy for the
   Clinton Administration, asserted they want "to create an
   integrated system with a card that everyone will get at
   birth."

another paragraph:

   "The smart card is an open, engraved invitation to a national
   identity card.  In the early 1980s when I worked in the West
   Wing of the White House as President Reagan's domestic policy
   adviser I was surprised by the ardent desire of government
   bureaucrats, many of them Reagan appointees, for a national
   identity card."

Apparently it almost happened.

   "The idea of a national identity card, with a new name, has
   risen once again from the graveyard of bad policy ideas, more
   powerful and virulent than ever.  Unless it is stopped quickly
   we may live to see the end of privacy in the United States,
   all of us tagged like so many fish."

The best part of this article is that it gives phone numbers to call
to express your opinion, as Clinton has invited the public to do.  I
urge everyone to call, and to spread the word.

        (202) 456 - 1414   White House switch board
        (202) 456 - 6406   Ira Magaziner's direct line (the person working
                           for Clinton on the smart card)

about the author:

        "Martin Anderson, a senior adviser on the President's Economic
        Policy Advisory Board during the Reagan administration, is now
        a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford.  He
        wrote this article fore the Scripps Howard News Service."

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 16:20:19 EST
From: David Sobel <[email-masked]>
Subject: File 3--White House Crypto Statement

  White House Crypto Statement

                         THE WHITE HOUSE

                  Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release                           April 16, 1993

                STATEMENT BY THE PRESS SECRETARY

The President today announced a new initiative that will bring
the Federal Government together with industry in a voluntary
program to improve the security and privacy of telephone
communications while meeting the legitimate needs of law
enforcement.

The initiative will involve the creation of new products to
accelerate the development and use of advanced and secure
telecommunications networks and wireless communications links.

For too long there has been little or no dialogue between our
private sector and the law enforcement community to resolve the
tension between economic vitality and the real challenges of
protecting Americans.  Rather than use technology to accommodate
the sometimes competing interests of economic growth, privacy and
law enforcement, previous policies have pitted government against
industry and the rights of privacy against law enforcement.

Sophisticated encryption technology has been used for years to
protect electronic funds transfer.  It is now being used to
protect electronic mail and computer files.  While encryption
technology can help Americans protect business secrets and the
unauthorized release of personal information, it also can be used
by terrorists, drug dealers, and other criminals.

A state-of-the-art microcircuit called the "Clipper Chip" has
been developed by government engineers.  The chip represents a
new approach to encryption technology.  It can be used in new,
relatively inexpensive encryption devices that can be attached to
an ordinary telephone.  It scrambles telephone communications
using an encryption algorithm that is more powerful than many in
commercial use today.

This new technology will help companies protect proprietary
information, protect the privacy of personal phone conversations
and prevent unauthorized release of data transmitted
electronically.  At the same time this technology preserves the
ability of federal, state and local law enforcement agencies to
intercept lawfully the phone conversations of criminals.

A "key-escrow" system will be established to ensure that the
"Clipper Chip" is used to protect the privacy of law-abiding
Americans.  Each device containing the chip will have two unique

                                2

"keys," numbers that will be needed by authorized government
agencies to decode messages encoded by the device.  When the
device is manufactured, the two keys will be deposited separately
in two "key-escrow" data bases that will be established by the
Attorney General.  Access to these keys will be limited to
government officials with legal authorization to conduct a
wiretap.

The "Clipper Chip" technology provides law enforcement with no
new authorities to access the content of the private
conversations of Americans.

To demonstrate the effectiveness of this new technology, the
Attorney General will soon purchase several thousand of the new
devices.  In addition, respected experts from outside the
government will be offered access to the confidential details of
the algorithm to assess its capabilities and publicly report
their findings.

The chip is an important step in addressing the problem of
encryption's dual-edge sword:  encryption helps to protect the
privacy of individuals and industry, but it also can shield
criminals and terrorists.  We need the "Clipper Chip" and other
approaches that can both provide law-abiding citizens with access
to the encryption they need and prevent criminals from using it
to hide their illegal activities.  In order to assess technology
trends and explore new approaches (like the key-escrow system),
the President has directed government agencies to develop a
comprehensive policy on encryption that accommodates:

     --   the privacy of our citizens, including the need to
          employ voice or data encryption for business purposes;

     --   the ability of authorized officials to access telephone
          calls and data, under proper court or other legal
          order, when necessary to protect our citizens;

     --   the effective and timely use of the most modern
          technology to build the National Information
          Infrastructure needed to promote economic growth and
          the competitiveness of American industry in the global
          marketplace; and

     --   the need of U.S. companies to manufacture and export
          high technology products.

The President has directed early and frequent consultations with
affected industries, the Congress and groups that advocate the
privacy rights of individuals as policy options are developed.

                                3

The Administration is committed to working with the private
sector to spur the development of a National Information
Infrastructure which will use new telecommunications and computer
technologies to give Americans unprecedented access to
information.  This infrastructure of high-speed networks
("information superhighways") will transmit video, images, HDTV
programming, and huge data files as easily as today's telephone
system transmits voice.

Since encryption technology will play an increasingly important
role in that infrastructure, the Federal Government must act
quickly to develop consistent, comprehensive policies regarding
its use.  The Administration is committed to policies that
protect all Americans' right to privacy while also protecting
them from those who break the law.

Further information is provided in an accompanying fact sheet.
The provisions of the President's directive to acquire the new
encryption technology are also available.

For additional details, call Mat Heyman, National Institute of
Standards and Technology, (301) 975-2758.

- - ---------------------------------

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION'S
TELECOMMUNICATIONS INITIATIVE

Q:   Does this approach expand the authority of government
     agencies to listen in on phone conversations?

A:   No.  "Clipper Chip" technology provides law enforcement with
     no new authorities to access the content of the private
     conversations of Americans.

Q:   Suppose a law enforcement agency is conducting a wiretap on
     a drug smuggling ring and intercepts a conversation
     encrypted using the device.  What would they have to do to
     decipher the message?

A:   They would have to obtain legal authorization, normally a
     court order, to do the wiretap in the first place.  They
     would then present documentation of this authorization to
     the two entities responsible for safeguarding the keys and
     obtain the keys for the device being used by the drug
     smugglers.  The key is split into two parts, which are
     stored separately in order to ensure the security of the key
     escrow system.

Q:   Who will run the key-escrow data banks?

A:   The two key-escrow data banks will be run by two independent
     entities.  At this point, the Department of Justice and the
     Administration have yet to determine which agencies will
     oversee the key-escrow data banks.

Q:   How strong is the security in the device?  How can I be sure
     how strong the security is?

A:   This system is more secure than many other voice encryption
     systems readily available today.  While the algorithm will
     remain classified to protect the security of the key escrow
     system, we are willing to invite an independent panel of
     cryptography experts to evaluate the algorithm to assure all
     potential users that there are no unrecognized
     vulnerabilities.

Q:   Whose decision was it to propose this product?

A:   The National Security Council, the Justice Department, the
     Commerce Department, and other key agencies were involved in
     this decision.  This approach has been endorsed by the
     President, the Vice President, and appropriate Cabinet
     officials.

Q:   Who was consulted?  The Congress?  Industry?

A:   We have on-going discussions with Congress and industry on
     encryption issues, and expect those discussions to intensify
     as we carry out our review of encryption policy.  We have
     briefed members of Congress and industry leaders on the
     decisions related to this initiative.

Q:   Will the government provide the hardware to manufacturers?

A:   The government designed and developed the key access
     encryption microcircuits, but it is not providing the
     microcircuits to product manufacturers.  Product
     manufacturers can acquire the microcircuits from the chip
     manufacturer that produces them.

Q:   Who provides the "Clipper Chip"?

A:   Mykotronx programs it at their facility in Torrance,
     California, and will sell the chip to encryption device
     manufacturers.  The programming function could be licensed
     to other vendors in the future.

Q:   How do I buy one of these encryption devices?

A:   We expect several manufacturers to consider incorporating
     the "Clipper Chip" into their devices.

Q:   If the Administration were unable to find a technological
     solution like the one proposed, would the Administration be
     willing to use legal remedies to restrict access to more
     powerful encryption devices?

A:   This is a fundamental policy question which will be
     considered during the broad policy review.  The key escrow
     mechanism will provide Americans with an encryption product
     that is more secure, more convenient, and less expensive
     than others readily available today, but it is just one
     piece of what must be the comprehensive approach to
     encryption technology, which the Administration is
     developing.

     The Administration is not saying, "since encryption
     threatens the public safety and effective law enforcement,
     we will prohibit it outright" (as some countries have
     effectively done); nor is the U.S. saying that "every
     American, as a matter of right, is entitled to an
     unbreakable commercial encryption product."  There is a
     false "tension" created in the assessment that this issue is
     an "either-or" proposition.  Rather, both concerns can be,
     and in fact are, harmoniously balanced through a reasoned,
     balanced approach such as is proposed with the "Clipper
     Chip" and similar encryption techniques.

Q:   What does this decision indicate about how the Clinton
     Administration's policy toward encryption will differ from
     that of the Bush Administration?

A:   It indicates that we understand the importance of encryption
     technology in telecommunications and computing and are
     committed to working with industry and public-interest
     groups to find innovative ways to protect Americans'
     privacy, help businesses to compete, and ensure that law
     enforcement agencies have the tools they need to fight crime
     and terrorism.

Q:   Will the devices be exportable?  Will other devices that use
     the government hardware?

A:   Voice encryption devices are subject to export control
     requirements.  Case-by-case review for each export is
     required to ensure appropriate use of these devices.  The
     same is true for other encryption devices.  One of the
     attractions of this technology is the protection it can give
     to U.S. companies operating at home and abroad.  With this
     in mind, we expect export licenses will be granted on a
     case-by-case basis for U.S. companies seeking to use these
     devices to secure their own communications abroad.  We plan
     to review the possibility of permitting wider exportability
     of these products.

              --------------end-------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 16:43:02 EST
From: Dave Banisar <[email-masked]>
Subject: File 4--Debate on Gov't Encryption Initiative (from CPSR)

April 16, 1993
Washington, DC

               COMPUTER PROFESSIONALS CALL FOR PUBLIC
           DEBATE ON NEW GOVERNMENT ENCRYPTION INITIATIVE

Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR)
today called for the public disclosure of technical data
underlying the government's newly-announced "Public Encryption
Management" initiative.  The new cryptography scheme was
announced today by the White House and the National Institute
for Standards and Technology (NIST), which will implement the
technical specifications of the plan.  A NIST spokesman
acknowledged that the National Security Agency (NSA), the super-
secret military intelligence agency, had actually developed the
encryption technology around which the new initiative is built.

According to NIST, the technical specifications and the
Presidential directive establishing the plan are classified.  To
open the initiative to public review and debate, CPSR today
filed a series of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests
with key agencies, including NSA, NIST, the National Security
Council and the FBI for information relating to the encryption
plan.  The CPSR requests are in keeping with the spirit of the
Computer Security Act, which Congress passed in 1987 in order to
open the development of non-military computer security standards
to public scrutiny and to limit NSA's role in the creation of
such standards.

CPSR previously has questioned the role of NSA in
developing the so-called "digital signature standard" (DSS), a
communications authentication technology that NIST proposed for
government-wide use in 1991.  After CPSR sued NIST in a FOIA
lawsuit last year, the civilian agency disclosed for the first
time that NSA had, in fact, developed that security standard.
NSA is due to file papers in federal court next week justifying
the classification of records concerning its creation of the
DSS.

David Sobel, CPSR Legal Counsel, called the
administration's apparent commitment to the privacy of
electronic communications, as reflected in today's official
statement,  "a step in the right direction."  But he questioned
the propriety of NSA's role in the process and the apparent
secrecy that has thus far shielded the development process from
public scrutiny.  "At a time when we are moving towards the
development of a new information infrastructure, it is vital
that standards designed to protect personal privacy be
established openly and with full public participation.  It is
not appropriate for NSA -- an agency with a long tradition of
secrecy and opposition to effective civilian cryptography -- to
play a leading role in the development process."

CPSR is a national public-interest alliance of computer
industry professionals dedicated to examining the impact of
technology on society.   CPSR has 21 chapters in the U.S. and
maintains offices in Palo Alto, California, Cambridge,
Massachusetts and Washington, DC.  For additional information on
CPSR, call (415) 322-3778 or e-mail <[email-masked]>.

------------------------------

Date: 16 Apr 93 22:00:39 EDT
From: Gordon Meyer <[email-masked]>
Subject: File 5--RU Sirius/Mondo interview (from GEnie)

The following is an edited transcript of a GEnie real-time conference held
with R.U. Sirius of Mondo 2000.  The full transcript is available
for downloading on GEnie.  Reprinted with permission.

Copyright (C), 1993 Jack Smith, the Writers' RoundTable All rights
reserved.  No part of this file may be reproduced or copied by any means
(graphic, electronic, magical or mechanical) without the written permission
of Jack Smith (GEnie address = WRITERS.INK, snail mail = 401 North
Washington Street, Rockville, MD, 20850, MN3).

This file was downloaded from the Writers' RoundTable on GEnie.  To join
GEnie you can signup via computer or by following these steps:

1) Set your communications software for half duplex (local echo) at 300,
1200 or 2400 baud.
2) Dial toll free: 1-800-638-8369 (or in Canada, 1-800-387-8330).  When you
see CONNECT on your screen, quickly type HHH.
3) At the U#= prompt, enter XTX99003,WRITERS and press Return.
4) Have a major credit card ready (or in the U.S., you can also use your
checking account number).
For voice information (in other words... a real person), call 800-638-9636.
*************
<[Jack] WRITERS.INK> Okay folks tonight's guest is R. U. Sirius of
the Mondo 2000 magazine and book.  I'll start off with the first
question... How did you come up with the name for the magazine?

<[R. U. Sirius]> We had a publication called Reality Hackers that wasn't
doing that well.  We were moving in the direction of cyberpunk and those
kinds of influences and wanted something that had more of an overall pop
gestalt.

I was watching tv severely  wasted one night and there were all these ads
for this and that "2000." and a whole show called Discovery 2000.  I
crawled into Queen Mu's bedroom and said  "Everybody's using 2000 to sell
shit.  Why not us?"  She immediately came up with MONDO 2000 cause she knew
that all the 0's would make for a good  looking logo.

<[Barbara] B.PAUL> I keep reading cyberpunk is dead; is that why you want a
more pop gestalt?

<[R. U.  Sirius]> Well, in a literal sense, cyberpunk was never really
alive. It's all media mythology and as the culture complexities, less  and
less people want to conform to any sort of tribal identity for a long
period of time.  But basically we wanted to really be effective
communicators and succeed at what we're doing.  And part of doing that
involves a bit of strategic thinking while at the same time working within
whatever your obsessions and interests happen to be... It was always
important to us that we published a very slick looking  magazine.  It's
like dressing up to get inside an establishment dinner. It's much more
subversive, I think, than picketing outside with your fist in the air.

<[Barbara] B.PAUL> Actually, I like the nonexistent cyberpunk myself; the
word has attached itself to a certain style and pov that are  distinctive.
Do you mean you've lost interest in it?

<[R. U. Sirius]> I like the sort of tough post punk no bullshit aesthetic
that was expressed through cyberpunk sci fi and the way that sort of took
on a living breathing reality in hacker and in industrial performance
culture. I just don't like to get caught up in movements or names like
cyberpunk.  The sense of the thing continues.  I know very few people who
actually want to call themselves "a Cyberpunk."

<HG> you seem to have an idea in mind in publishing MONDO 200o, do you have
a succinct philosophy?

<[R. U. Sirius] PRESS22>
HA!!!!  The explanation for the meme changes every time I have to answer
the question.  I'll put it in two ways, one of them politic and the other
one vulgar
1)  MONDO is a magazine for the culture of cyberspace, for a
    generation that has grown up inside of media, inside of bits and bytes
    and who can recognize the fact that this is the primary territory in
    which our socio-political and economic lives are taking place.  It's
    about consciously occupying that space. In fact, it's possible that a
    relatively democratic do-it-yourself "sub"culture has really moved into
    cyberspace more completely than the power elites.
2:  MONDO 2000 is here to give the high tech culture of America in the 90's
    the enema it so desperately needs!!!

<[Bryce] K.CAMPBELL14> What's your opinion on the media/corporations
applying the 'cyber' label to everything (from Networks like GEnie to
microprocessor controlled toasters).

<[R. U. Sirius] PRESS22> It's good for MONDO and what's good for MONDO is
good for Amerika!  Seriously though it's just another bit of language
manipulation that everybody 'll soon  get sick of next everybody from GE
to toasters will try to latch on to shamanism... like, Be all that you can
be in the new shamanic army etcetera.

<[Danny] D.PERLMAN> I have limited contact with the mag, having skimmed the
book and read issue 8 in the last 48 hours (my mind is cyber goo) but, I
found it fascinating. However, I noted right off the bat that the leadoff
article on Information America had some stuff that didn't quite sit right
fact-wise, and with about 90 seconds of computer time determined that, at
least according to the databases of the two newspapers cited, the articles,
used as bibliographic reference don't exist.  What's the deal?  Are your
articles intended to be "factual", or more for amusement?

<[R. U. Sirius] PRESS22> I believe that article was intended to be accurate
although employing hardcore fact checkers is not in our budget yet. We've
gotten a number of letters on that piece going both ways, challenging some
of the details or adding additional paranoid data to the brew.  We'd be
interested in any specific details that you care to refute.

<[John] J.BILICSKA> Do you foresee MONDO 2000 ever becoming a victim of
its own success, a la ROLLING STONE (since mass culture absorbs every
counterculture, eventually)?

<[R. U. Sirius] PRESS22> If the magazine gets sold to somebody else, it
might get wimp-ized.  But as long as Mu and I are at it, it'll always be
wierd.  We can't help it.  SUre, we might sell it some day and apply our
wierdness to something else.

<[John] J.BILICSKA> Are you contemplating a multimedia/interactive
version of MONDO 2000?  I think it would really blow the minds of
suburbanites buying those CD-ROM drives.

<[R. U. Sirius] PRESS22> Yeah, I'm talking with somebody right now about
doing a cd rom version of the  Guide. Also, might edit a cd rom version
of Peter Stafford's Psychedelic's  Encyclopedia, a return to my roots for
me...  hope CBS doesn't hear about it!

<[CuD] GRMEYER> I've been enjoying the book and mag for quite some time
now, thanks.  I've wondered if you've ever run into any 'censorship' (at
whatever level).

<[R. U. Sirius] PRESS22> We've had problems with printers, I believe over
female breasts, though the current printer, who we've been with for I
think 5 issues, hasn't given us any  problems.  We've had some internal
wrangles, which I won't go into... guess I'll have to write an
autobiography some day.

<[Jack] WRITERS.INK> Since magazines tend to be business and business means
money, I was curious if you have control of the magazine or if you have
investors who profer opinions and advice.  Success doesn't always bring
the best ... er help.

<[R. U. Sirius] PRESS22> To be honest, Queen Mu is the majority owner and
has complete control over the magazine.  We do wrestle occasionally...

                   ***end of conference excerpt***

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 8 Apr 93 23:59:48 CDT
From: Ron <[email-masked]>
Subject: File 6--Rune Stone BBS (IIRG Home Board) Back On-Line

 US BBS Callers: Rune Stone BBS (IIRG WHQ) 203-832-8441 NUP:Conspiracy

Thanks once again: Mercenary/IIRG
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

        THE INTERNATIONAL INFORMATION RETRIEVAL GUILD

                 Invites The Readers of CUD

         To Call and Participate on The IIRG's Public
              Bulletin Board System, and WHQ :

                   The Rune Stone BBS.

              Available at: (203)-832-8441
                  14.4 HST Public Node
              1200-2400 Baud Callers Welcome

        Home of The IIRG Archives and Phantasy Magazine
              3000+ Hack/Phreak Text and Magazines
                    Archived by The IIRG.

              NO Ratios, and No Access Charges
        in the tradition of FREE information for all.

           Sysop: Mercenary     Co-Sysop: Anubis
               New User Password: CONSPIRACY

------------------------------

End of Computer Underground Digest #5.28
************************************