Software Vault: The Gold Collection/Software Vault - The Gold Collection (American Databankers) (1993).ISO/cdr11/think020.zip/THINK020.MAG

Text File | 1993-06-01 | 32KB | 662 lines

Thinking Magazine (TM) Issue #20                       05-02-93
Copyright 1993 by Marc Perkel - All Rights Reserved

Editor Marc Perkel
Computer Tyme
411 North Sherman, Suite 300
Springfield MO. 65802

417-866-1222 voice
417-866-0135 fax
417-866-1665 bbs
71333,427    CIS
MARC @ CTYME mhs

Thinking Magazine is a Trademark of Marc Perkel


Thinking Magazine is a BBS distributed publication. Any BBS may carry
this magazine under the following conditions:

   1) That it be published in complete form.

   2) No fee is charged to access it over your regular access charges.


Articles of Thinking Magazine may be reprinted as long as I am mentioned
as the author and that you don't butcher the meaning or quote me out of
context.


Why Thinking Magazine?

Thinking magazine is a collection of my ideas and views of reality as I
see it. I am totally frustrated with the general stupidity of society
and as a way of relieving my frustrations I have decided to publish my
views. My views are not always correct, but I do guarantee them to be
well thought out and interesting. My purpose is to provide you, the
reader, with information that will stimulate you intellectually whether
or not you agree with me.

This publication is dedicated to those readers who are thinkers. That is
why I have decided to distribute this electronically. The minimum IQ
test here is that you have a computer and a modem and you are a sharp
enough user to download a file and read it.


THE BATTLE CONTINUES ...

As you know this last week the Republicans launched a successful
filibuster against Bill Clinton's economic stimulus package. Successful
to the extent that they managed to prevent it from being voted on by the
Senate. This prompted me to write the following letter and fax it to
the House and Senate as well as my newspaper list.


                           ==> Minority Rule <==

   We live in a democracy -- or do we? In a democracy the majority
   rules. That's the way it used to be here in America but not any more.
   Do to a loophole in the system, called a filibuster, the minority can
   rule by gridlocking the system and blockading the Senate.

   The filibuster is a loophole that has been around for a long time.
   But even though its been there, it has only been used in the most
   extreme of circumstances -- until recently.

   In our last election we the people sent government a strong message
   that we wanted to end gridlock in government. We said, in all three
   parties, that we wanted honest leaders of the highest integrity. We
   all voted with the expectation that whoever was elected would be
   fiscally responsible and spend our tax dollars as if this money were
   their own. We also, as a nation, voted for people who we expected to
   protect our constitutional rights and to preserve and protect our
   democracy which we Americans hold with pride as an example to the
   world of how good and decent people can live.

   That's why I, as a Republican, am deeply ashamed and embarrassed by
   the filibuster by our party in the Senate. Although I'm not the least
   bit thrilled with Clinton's value added tax, it is more important to
   realize that our rights, as citizens of a democracy, are not to be
   stolen. 43 individuals have decided that their personal political
   future is more important than the preservation of the democratic
   principle of majority rule. I think it's time that we Republicans
   send our leaders a strong message the "We the People" rule and that
   you elected officials are our servants, and not our masters!


This letter has managed to draw more response than most letters I've
written. I got calls from the offices of two Congressmen who wanted me
to remove them from their fax list. I faxed them back and told them that I
wouldn't. The way I see it is that is their job to read faxes from me or
anyone else who wants to communicate with them. But the most interesting
response comes from Jesse Helms office. Jesse writes:


                         United States Senate
                       Washington DC. 20510-3301

                            April 22, 1993



   Mr. Marc Perkel
   Computer Tyme Software Lab
   411 North Sherman, Suite 300
   Springfield, Mo. 65802

   Dear Mr. Perkel,

   I could not let another minute go by without responding to your fax
   dated April 21, 1993. I wonder what the folks in the media have been
   feeding you lately?

   I would be interested in knowing, Mr. Perkel, when did a filibuster
   become a loophole? The filibuster exists so that 51 members of one
   party could not consistently steamroll 49 members of the other (or
   57-43 in this case). It also insures that regional interests are not
   ignored, like those of Midwestern cattle farmers.

   You said that through the elections, the people have demanded
   "honesty" and "fiscal responsibility" from their leaders and I agree.
   But do you think it is "honest" that this "jobs" package has been
   filled with non-job creating programs that will cost tens of millions
   of dollars? Do you think it is "honest" and "fiscally responsible" to
   pass a "stimulus" package that is not paid for and will just add
   directly to the debt?

   By the way, even the most liberal Senators in the Republican party
   (those who vote with the Democrats more than 60% of the time) know
   that Clinton's "jobs/stimulus" package is a hoax.

   I think you might want to read the details of the package and
   appreciate the fact that the interests of 49 percent of the people
   are not disregarded.

                                   Sincerely,
                                   Jesse Helms



So I read this letter and wonder if he thinks I'm dumb enough to believe
this or are these guys so adept at telling lies that they believe it
themselves. However, there is no point in arguing issues that both of us
already know.

The bottom line is that Jesse Helms is a Senator and his vote counts.
The logical move is to try to bring the discussion around to subjects
where we share a common goal and common concerns. As one Republican to
another there are issues of the future of the party that we both care
about. This is the approach I tried to take in my response.


   04-24-93

   Dear Senator Jesse Helms,

   Thank you for personally responding to my letter. A filibuster has
   always been a loophole. It allows a minority to gridlock government
   by preventing bills from being voted on. Just because it's been
   around for a long time and that it has been used by both parties
   doesn't make it right.

   Taking the position that you are defending the economy is hog wash.
   Over the last 12 years I watched both houses and the President borrow
   and spend 3 trillion dollars. So for Republicans to gridlock over a
   mere 16 billion is strictly for show.

   One of the things that is happening in America is that we can no
   longer afford the luxury of being stupid. We now have a President
   that is serious about fixing the economy and he has offered the
   Republican party the opportunity to share in the glory of the
   recovery. An offer that we Republicans would be smart to take.

   For example. When Nixon resigned in disgrace, I thought I would never
   forgive him. But 20 years later when he started pressuring Bush to
   help the Russians convert to democracy I decided that he had paid for
   his sins. There certainly have been a lot of sins the last twelve
   years and that's why record numbers of us Republicans did not vote
   Republican in 1992. We want to see our party get back to what I call,
   Traditional Republican Values -- Less Government, Fiscal
   Responsibility, and keeping the government out of peoples private
   business.

   We can no longer afford partisan politics and to pretend that our
   party represents some great moral principle. We are what we do and
   what we are doing is not the least bit honorable at all. The time has
   come for Republicans and Democrats to work together and fight over
   who gets the glory for doing the right thing, rather than who gets
   the blame for doing the wrong thing.

   Bill Clinton needs Republican help to influence his plans towards a
   more conservative outcome. There is an important and necessary role
   for Republicans, like yourself, to play in the recovery.

   The bottom line Jesse is this. It is imperative to the future of
   America that we turn the economy around. And we must succeed! I don't
   think you realize how angry many of us Republicans are. We need to
   resist the dark forces in our party and get back to reality. Next
   year is the 1994 elections. A failing economy is not going to be good
   for Republicans. But a recovering economy will be especially if we
   are part of that recovery. Think about it.


   Marc Perkel

   P.S.

   I faxed my original letter to 250 newspapers. It will be interesting
   to know how many printed it.


This letter managed to keep his attention except that it took two days
for him to respond this time. He is also communicating by mail (snail)
where I'm using a fax board. Jesse responds:


                         United States Senate
                       Washington DC. 20510-3301

                            April 26, 1993



   Mr. Marc Perkel
   Computer Tyme Software Lab
   411 North Sherman, Suite 300
   Springfield, Mo. 65802

   Dear Mr. Perkel,

   I received your letter dated April 24, 1993.

   The Senate has many parlimentary rules and procedures under which it
   operates and the filibuster is one of them. If you think it is a
   "loophole", then so be it. We'll have to agree to disagree.

   Were the President and Senate Democrats "working together" with
   Senate Republicans before he presented a long term, increased
   spending package last month? How about the pork package you seem to
   love so much? The answer to both is "no."

   My idea of "working together" is not simply letting the President and
   the Democrats cram bad bills down our throats. With the debt
   increasing by a billion dollars each day, I have absolutely no
   intention of voting for more government spending, especially when the
   money isn't there. Such was the case with the President's pork
   package.

   Mr. Perkel, where did you get the idea that 16 billion dollars is a
   paltry amount of money? Your characterization that it is a "mere"
   sum shows your hind-quarters. And I thought the liberals in Congress
   had lost sight of whose money they are spending.

   I would I suggest again that you read the details of the package. I
   don't think you know what's in it. Perhaps there was a pork morsel
   that you had your eye on?

                                   Sincerely,
                                   Jesse Helms


"Pork morsel?" There's a tongue twister for ya. Try saying that three
times fast after drinking a couple of beers.

In letters like this you have to look past the basic name calling to try
to get at the meat of what is actually being said. There is a temptation
to just write back and say, "Eat my pork morsel!", but that won't
accomplish anything. Once you get past the "Pork, Pork, Pork, Liberal,
Liberal, Liberal" he does have a point that in fact, the Democrats are
indeed trying to cram bills down their throats. Some of these bills are
bills that the Republicans would support if they had time enough to read
them and had some input when the bills were written.

But, to avoid getting bogged down in the details and to try to keep the
discussion on a productive track, I decided to ignore issues that we
aren't going to agree on and again look for common ground, if that is
possible. If not, I'll just have to at least keep him pissed off.

   04-29-93

   Dear Senator Jesse Helms,

   I got your letter Dated April 26, 1993 today. I enjoy a "spirited"
   discussion. It's much more interesting than the occasional form
   letter I get that has nothing to do with what I was talking about.

   I get this same response every time I talk to Republicans about
   working with Democrats. I don't want to hear what you can't/won't do.
   I want to hear what you can/will do. Partisan politics must end.

   President Clinton has a very aggressive plan for dealing with the
   problems of the economy. Many of his proposals are very conservative
   and Republican friendly. Many, of course, aren't. I want to
   concentrate on the ones that are.

   Clinton want's to bring back the investment tax credit and make it
   permanent. Democrats don't want to do it. But if Republican team up
   with conservative Democrats and Clinton loyalists then they can get
   it passed. Clinton's biggest enemy may well be his own party and his
   biggest friend could turn out to be Republicans. That is if
   Republicans are smart enough to figure that out.

   If, for instance, Republicans were to start teaming up with the
   President on the spending cuts first, then it is a lot easier to
   argue against tax increases. Clinton's a smart man and I'm sure he is
   re-evaluating his relationship with Republicans as to how to more
   effectively work with us.

   The 1994 elections are not so far away. I think it is important to
   look at how we are to be perceived. I want to be seen as part of the
   solution rather than part of the problem. It wouldn't take much
   effort for Republicans to be perceived as being a crucial factor in
   the recovery.

   The President said that there's plenty of blame to go around for both
   parties. I say that if you fix the economy that there's plenty of
   glory to go around as well. How quick it is that we forgive once the
   problem is fixed. How quick we are to anger if it isn't.

   I personally am willing to work with anyone, (even you), to help fix
   the economy. I attend both Lincoln Day and Jackson Day and buy into
   all the most expensive dinners. I treasure my picture of me and
   Hillary as much as my picture of me and Bob Dole. It's time to come
   up with a new approach because what we are doing now clearly isn't
   working.


You know when you're a Clinton supporter you start thinking that
Democrats are the good guys and the Republicans are the bad guys. But
that isn't reality. But in looking back at the events that led up to the
filibuster, there were several sins on the part of the Democrats that
led up to the filibuster.

If you remember, every bill that the Democrats introduced dealing with
the economy was introduced under "emergency" procedures. Now we all know
that the economy is in trouble, but not so bad that it requires a total
disrespect for the rules of Congress. Thus, if I'm going to be
bipartisan then it's only fair that I slam the Democrats when they cross
the line.

                  ==> Democratic Emergency Bull Crap <==

   Last week I sent out a fax to Congress and the press beating up on
   the Republicans over the Senate Filibuster. This week I beat up on
   the Democrats.

   There's a joke going around that if Pro is the opposite of Con then
   the opposite of Progress is Congress -- but that joke isn't funny
   anymore. Just as the Republicans are abusing the filibuster, the
   Democrats are abusing the emergency legislation procedures.

   We all know that the economy is in serious trouble, but it is an
   insult to the intelligence of Americans to say that it is such and
   emergency that you can't wait the required extra 3 DAYS so that those
   voting on the bill have time to read it.

   Just because the Democrats are in power doesn't mean they have to
   steamroll legislation through by twisting the rules. I feel that I
   speak for all Americans when I say, it is absolutely imperative that
   legislators from all parties work together to fix the economy and
   share in the glory of the recovery. That means that Democrats must
   include Republicans as part of the process. So it's time you guys
   grow up and earned your paycheck.

   Ross Perot has already started his 1996 Presidential campaign. I'm
   sure you all would love to serve under him. NOT!


At this point I'm not ready to say that the Democrats caused the
Republicans to filibuster. The Republicans might well have done it no
matter how good the Democrats were to them. However, the Democrats
created the type of environment that invited the filibuster. And in my
mind, where you have a situation where "it is absolutely imperative that
legislators from all parties work together to fix the economy and share
in the glory of the recovery", creating this environment is the same as
causing it to happen.

Anyhow, I continue to stay on these guys' backs about demanding results.
I think that everyone can agree that we need to fix America and whether
or not you agree with me as to how to do it, the goal is the same. I
think, therefore, that it is helpful to stay on these guys' backs about
what their job is. I see myself as being a grain of sand, looking for an
oyster to make a pearl with.


LINE ITEM VETO ...

The Democrates are trying to fake us out with a bill called "Enhanced
Recision" that they are trying to pass off as a "Line Item Veto" bill.
It isn't. Although it is better than nothing, it is just barely better
than nothing. So I sent this letter to Congress.

                        ==> Line Item Veto <==

   Last year Americans voted for CHANGE but all Congress wants to give
   us is SAME. That's the best way to describe the "Enhanced Recision"
   bill that the Democrats want to pass off as "Line Item Veto". This
   bill is a useless fraud that the Democrats in Congress want to pass
   because that think we are stupid enough to fall for it. Well, we
   aren't.

   President Clinton wants the Line Item Veto and he needs to stop being
   a pussy and side with Republicans and conservative Democrats to get
   it passed.

   I'm not entirely comfortable with the Republican bill either in that
   a two-thirds vote of both houses puts too much power in the hands of
   the President. So this is a good opportunity for some compromise.

   The right bill, in my humble opinion, would be very similar to the
   Republican version except that instead if two-thirds of both houses
   that the right number would be between 50% and 60% of both houses
   with four-sevenths being what I consider just about right. But
   anything less than 50% of both houses is totally unacceptable.

   I'm a strong Clinton supporter. I sent out 6,000 letters by fax
   supporting him during the campaign. But this Enhanced Recision bill
   is a DISGRACE and the Democratic Party should be ashamed they ever
   brought it up.

   I think all of you are under the illusion that the 1994 election will
   be like the rest where you will all be re-elected because you're
   incumbents. There are a few things that are going to be different
   that you need to be aware of. The United We Stand party will have a
   candidate in every election. One can only guess how effective they
   will be and what kind of effect they will have.

   Another factor is that there are software companies that are
   developing CD-ROM based voting programs that will contain an
   incredible amount of information about incumbents and their records.
   And this software will be available for $25 at stores such as Sears
   and Wal-Mart. In 1994 you are going to be facing a much more informed
   electorate. I suggest a strategy of "do the right thing" might be an
   effective way to get reelected.

   The bottom line is that we voters are ANGRY. And we are angry at YOU.
   We are not as STUPID as you think we are and we are getting smarter.
   New technology is allowing us to get better information and sift
   through the LIES. It is time for government to join the real world or
   government will be replaced. Americans want REAL change; the
   President wants REAL change; and you guys are in the way.

   You know, I have friends that talk to me about these letters I'm
   faxing you and they say to me, "Gee Marc, I'm not sure I'd say the
   things you do. How do you know the FBI isn't bugging your phone?" To
   which I respond, "I hope the FBI is bugging my phone because that way
   at least SOMEONE in government is listening to me!"


1996 ELECTIONS ALREADY BEGUN ...

You know, it used to be that the Presidential elections started about a
year before election day, but it seems that the 1996 elections have
gotten an early start. Now no one has officially announced that they are
a candidate, but except for the minor formality there are plenty of
candidates already on the campaign trail.

Jack Kemp came out of the starting gate first. He's been running ever
since the 1992 Republican convention and contributed to the defeat of
George Bush. Talk about dog eat dog! Is this a new record for an early
start? I think so.

It's hard to tell when Ross Perot started running for the 1996 election.
I don't think he ever stopped running. He's already buying his political
commercials and running them.

Now you might ask, "Political commercials, Marc? Don't you think that
Perot is just trying to help?" No, I don't. Perot is a mixed bag. Some
of what he does and says is beneficial in that the country does need to
put the squeeze on Congress and the President. But here's the bottom
line. When you look at what he's saying from the perspective of "Is this
good for America?" vs. "Is this good for the Perot campaign?" it is
clearly better for Perot than it is for America.

It's easy to second guess the challenge of turning the economy around
when you're not the one who has to do it. I find it amazing that Perot,
who in his 1992 campaign called for a 50 cent-a-gallon gas tax would
have the gull to slam Clinton for his energy tax. The only difference
between Ross Perot and Rush Limbaugh is that Limbaugh does it for the
money and Perot does it for power.

But the real culprit is Bob Dole who started his campaign with a visit
to Iowa and New Hampshire and although he didn't officially announce he is
running in 1996, has been making reference in his speeches about those
two stops. I listened to him on C-Span speaking to a press club dinner
and what I heard was candidate Dole who was going to use his influence
to what is best for Bob Dole and the hell with the rest of the country.
Thus, in my weekly address to Congress I faxed the following letter:


                     ==> CONFLICT OF INTEREST <==

   It's pretty obvious to me that Bob Dole is already running for
   President. This is a very interesting concept when you consider the
   events that would have to occur for him to actually succeed.

   Lets explore this idea from a 1996 point of view. If in 1996 Clinton
   has turned the economy around and we are clearly in recovery then Bob
   Dole, or any challenger wouldn't have a snowball's chance in hell of
   beating him.

   However, if things continue to get worse and the economy is really
   bad and the Republicans can dig up some good dirt on Perot then Dole
   has a chance.

   So how is this going to affect his job as leader of the Senate? On
   one hand if he helps Clinton fix the economy, he destroys his chances
   in the 1996 elections. But if helps ruin the economy then he can
   blame it on the President.

   "But Marc", you ask, "Surely Bob Dole, the honorable minority leader
   of the Senate, isn't going to put his own personal political future
   above the future of all Americans is he?"

   I don't know. You tell me. Out here in the real world this would
   clearly be a conflict of interest. But the Congress and the Senate
   are above the laws that we citizens live by. We can't force them to
   play by the rules because they make the rules and they have decided
   that they are above the rules. But the bottom line is that it just
   isn't right for Bob Dole to be the minority leader and run for
   President at the same time. Bob Dole should resign.


THEY TAUGHT US HOW TO ADD WRONG ...

One of these days I'm going to go into what's wrong with schools. That
could eat up three issues in a row. But this issue I'm just going to
touch on one item and teach you all how to add up columns of numbers in
your head just like the "human calculators" do it. Amaze you friends and
win bar bets because it is easier than you think. And don't you want to
know how it's done? Of course you do!

OK, lets start with some numbers:

                                      649
                                      582
                                     +934
                                     ----

The way you do it is to add left to right instead of right to left. We
start in the upper right hand corner and start adding downward and then
to the right.

600 + 500 is 1100, + 900 is 2000, + 40 is 2040, + 80 is 2120, + 30 is
2150, + 9 is 2159, + 2 is 2161, + 4 is 2165! It's that easy!

Anyhow, with a little practice you can get fast enough that you can add
the numbers faster than you can key them into a pocket calculator. All
you have to use is your eyes. They have to use their fingers which are
slower. So it shouldn't take long before you can win races against the
calculator and be making the big money in bar bets. All I ask is,
that you still remember me when you get rich.


BRAINSHARE - WHERE NERDS RULE ...

I went to Novell's annual software developers conference again this
year. This year they drew 5000 people. I put together 1000 of my Network
Survival Kit packages that I labeled "NerdWare" and included a button I
made, "Nerd Liberation Movement - Coming out of the back room!" I
should have brought twice as many. They were gone in no time.

Novell was touting their latest accomplishment, Netware 4.0. 4.0 is a
very impressive network operating system and will make the design and
construction of large networks a lot easier. But Netware 4.0 has some
serious problems and its going to be interesting to see how it evolves.

First of all, Netware 4.0 isn't done. This is a product that is being
sold before it's finished. It's not as bad as Netware 3.0 when it was
released, in that it won't crash the server if you turn a printer off,
but there are several things missing.

Among the missing is Macintosh name space support. So if you're running
a mixed DOS/MAC environment you're going to have to wait. The only API
interface involves linking in a 170k object module which makes even the
smallest and simplest programs grow to 200k in size. And if you're not
programming in C you're screwed.

The new VLM shells are buggy and unstable as is bindery emulation. These
are going to break a lot of applications. If you don't use these shells,
or you use the old login API then you don't have access to Directory
Services and programs like NetAdmin won't even load.

But I am looking forward to the new features. When you log in, you log
into the entire network, not just one server. Netware 4 also has disk
compression but implements it differently that Stacker or DoubleSpace.
Netware compresses files after they haven't been accessed in a while.
That allows Netware to compress files smaller than they could if they
had to do it "on the fly". Their compression algorithm is optimized to
compress for size, but decompress for speed.

So you ask, "Marc, should I buy Netware 4?" It depends on your site. If
you are a big site and want to start testing 4.0 and planning a
conversion then get Netware 4.0 now and start playing with it, but don't
plan on running it yet. Otherwise, I'd estimate that it will take about
another year before Netware 4 is done.

Got to play with Univel out there as well. Like Netware 4.0, Univel
needs some work in it's ability to run DOS programs. Although it is
impressive when you watch their demo, when I put my software on it, it
didn't take much time to lock the DOS sessions up.

DOS is limited to the 8.3 style file names. (Something that needs to be
changed.) Unix doesn't have this limitation. But Unix makes no attempt
to hide these file names from DOS so if you have utilities that read the
directory file list and see long names your application tends to bite the
dust. I brought up an editor in a X-Window and hit the hot key to switch
the editor into 50-line mode. It did switch, but the screen didn't
change so only half the editor was visible. In Windoze, this works.

I did a lot of asking about DR-DOS 7 and it seems that 7.0 is a bigger
secret than Hillary's health care plan. I was surprised to see very
little DR-DOS at Brainshare except for one session on DPMS (Dos
Protected Mode Services) that lets you write real mode TSRs that run in
protected mode memory. I'm looking forward to when they actually release
it. My concern about 7.0 is that it will be released without enough
testing and will be to unstable and incompatible to run.

Some of the general sessions were very interesting. John Scully (CEO of
Apple) gave a great presentation on his efforts to lobby Congress in
support if information highways. Phillip Kahn was rather boring. He made
a good presentation if it's the first time you've seen it, but he does
the same thing every time and this was my third time. He needs a new
act.

At the start of the general sessions they often show video clips of the
great leaders in the computer industry making profound statements about
the industry. One was of Bill Gates and when his video clip came on he
was hissed and booed by the crowd. Bill, you have an image problem.
Software developers hate you. Play nice!

There is a common philosophy in the world of nerdom that who you are is
more important that what you wear. Thus, wearing a suit and tie doesn't
make a lot of sense. We think it's more important that blood flows to
our brain. At Brainshare, dress is not only casual, but Novell, in
recognition of the dominate nerd culture officially prohibited any
Novell employee from wearing a suit and tie!

I think it was a good move because at Brainshare when everyone is casual
and there are a few suits running around you get to thinking that these
are the "sales types" like the ones that are perhaps responsible for
forcing software to market before it's ready. Although I personally
believe that one shouldn't be judged by the clothes they wear. There are
a lot of smart people who shouldn't be stereotyped as stupid just because
they wear a suit, but when in Rome do as the Romans do. And at
Brainshare the Romans are nerds!


TWISTED LOGIC AWARD ...

I saw a file on Compuserve in the political forum that was one of many
files from people taking a pro-smoking position. There is one point they
made that takes the Thinking Magazine Twisted Logic Award.

The point was that smokers are actually subsidizing non-smokers because
non-smokers live longer. By living longer they draw more Social Security
than smokers do and that creates an unfair burden on smokers who have to
pay the same FICA taxes as non-smokers.

With that thought I leave it with you. Till next time ... take care.