jad@hpfcla.UUCP (jad) (08/07/85)
I came across this note in net.mail ( a supposedly non-bizarre
(or is that sensible) ), and thought that it belonged here ...
so here it is. If any of you can make sense of it, I am sorry
that I posted it here. Not quite the top-of-the-line weirdness,
but it's sure odd for a "regular" group ... anyway, without
further ado, here is the "weird-note"
(the sad thing is someone might have been somewhat serious when
they wrote this, and not under the influence of large quantities
of hallucinogenic material, which appears to explain much of the
other postings to this group ... )
/***** hpfclo:net.mail / alice!mvs / 5:48 pm Aug 3, 1985*/
One of the pleasant news I've got earlier this year was that many,
backbone sites are not doing rerouting. It behooves addresses to
rewrite, and cannot. Furthermore, it makes it impossible for a person
to know your address before he can mail to it. Well, you ask him for
his mail address, and then based on what he tells you, you mentally
translate your address before he can tell you his.
The point I am not making in the header of a mail message was sent to
me. Given the proper data, a uucp route maps into a graph traversal,
specifying a given host at least not in this paragraph. Obviously any
connected undirected graph can be degrees of "smartness." In that
case, just giving the name is insufficient, you have a religious belief
that messages should not have headers. As an example, chuqui's
uucp->arpa->uucp problem is that not everybody will convert to rfc822
mailers. The only exception is a by-product of some of the dreaded
arpanet. By introducing {}'s and maintaining the same trick that you
are a typical sort of AT&T employee who isn't even capable of learning
not to post "house for sale in NJ" ads on net.general.
I disagree with Peter that automatic rewriting gateways) that serves to
prolong the existing situation (total chaos) is bad. Peter's solution
to that is more than routes, they're addresses.
Robert Adams reminds us that "Rob Pike, in a compiler". It's therefore
always dangerous to disagree with Peter in public, because your mailbox
will fill up with a way to us. You don't know where you got ^ as a
tree, but the world stops paying any attention to them. If you are
(even princeton), you should send me mail at topaz!rutgers!hedrick, and
he'll send me mail at "jordan@ucb-vax.berkeley.edu". end of
discussion.
/* ---------- */
"...like, wow, man"
-- jad --judith@proper.UUCP (Judith Abrahms) (08/11/85)
In article <> jad@hpfcla.UUCP (jad) writes: > > I came across this note in net.mail ( a supposedly non-bizarre > (or is that sensible) ), and thought that it belonged here ... > so here it is. If any of you can make sense of it, I am sorry > that I posted it here.... No problem. To a veteran user of the Burroughs Sort Algorithm, it's clear that what looks like this... >One of the pleasant news I've got earlier this year was that many, >backbone sites are not doing rerouting. It behooves addresses to >rewrite, and cannot. Furthermore, it makes it impossible for a person >to know your address before he can mail to it. Well, you ask him for >his mail address, and then based on what he tells you, you mentally >translate your address before he can tell you his. > >The point I am not making in the header of a mail message was sent to >me. Given the proper data, a uucp route maps into a graph traversal, >specifying a given host at least not in this paragraph.... [Etc.] ... can easily be decrypted into this: One of the pleasant news I've got earlier this year is that many, Robert Adams reminds us that "Rob Pike, in a compiler." It's therefore the point I am not making in the header of a mail message was sent to you arpanet. By introducing {}s and maintaining the same trick that you are a typical sort of AT&T employee who isn't even capable of learning always dangerous to disagree with Peter in public, because your mailbox backbone sites are not doing rerouting. It behooves addresses to connected undirected graph can be degrees of "smartness." In that case, just giving the name is insufficient, you have a religious belief his mail address, and then based on what he tells you, you mentally he'll send me mail at "jordan@ucb-vax.berkeley.edu". Given the proper data, a uucp route maps into a graph traversal, mailers. The only exception is a by-product of some of the dreaded not to post "house for sale in NJ" ads on net.general. The existing situation (total chaos) is bad. Peter's solution rewrite, and cannot. Furthermore, it makes it impossible for a person specifying a given host at least not in this paragraph. Obviously any to know your address before he can mail to it. Well, you ask him for translate your address before he can tell you that messages should not have headers. As an example, chuqui's to that is more than routes, they're addresses. The world stops paying any attention to them. If you are uucp->arpa->uucp problem is that not everybody will convert to rfc822 will fill up with a way to us. You don't know where you got ^ as a end of discussion. > "...like, wow, man" > -- jad -- Like I'm hip, you know? J.A.