Re: creating a CU reflector scanner

Harry (
Sat, 09 Nov 1996 10:17:31 -0800

Bill Woodland (Squeek) wrote:
> Regarding Streak's Scanner:
> The intention was NEVER
> to allow people to see who was on a private reflector, or who was in a
> private CONFERENCE on an otherwise PUBLIC reflector. The entire project was
> meant for PUBLIC reflectors only.

Yes, I can see that was the intention. But for those of us from the
pre-web days, who cant shake our old ways, using the resources of the
internet AND OUR BRAINS to do things not previously done before, or at
least to come up an idea independant of others instructions, is what the
internet is suppose to be for. It is a place to explore. HACKING,
before corporate and media influences twisted its meaning, was a good
thing. There is nothing malicious or wrong with HACKING. It is
exploring places not intended to be explored; looking does not harm.
Exploring in any realm takes smarts and stamina. It had always been
nurtured here on the internet;I'd hate to see the PROGRAMMERS and IS
professionals take this anti-exploring stance too.

And who's complaining about this???

> Then the trouble came. Some operators of private reflectors started
> emailing Streak telling him that they didn't want their reflectors listed
> there (even tho they were not on the list)

If names were named, Squeek, you and I both know this list of operators
would be overwhelmingly ADULT REFLECTOR OPS. And there is just
something WRONG with siding with the guy who is mad because people are
looking at his wife's vagina without PAYING HIM FIRST.

Dont get me wrong; I grudgingly accept the fact that commerce is taking
over the internet. Like it or not, the adult side of the commerce world
is the fastest growing section of the internet. But when ya get through
all the song and dance Squeek, arent we talking about guys getting onto
adult refs without paying? Has anyone LOST MONEY HERE? Maybe-just
maybe the potential for some revenue would be lost. But SO WHAT?

Streak wrote a damn fine piece of programming; and folks who understood
its use - without any instruction or even hints from Streak - made use

> and others disliked the fact that he was telnetting into their reflector to get
> the WHO information.

Again this would be folks who dont even know what telnet is or why/how
their reflector is "falling victum" to it. If you put an IP onto the
PUBLIC INTERNET, you have joined the PUBLIC INTERNET. Cant throw a fit
everytime someone walks into the store without buying. (yes, I know
seeing a movie without paying is the better anology, but that works
against my point;-)

> Some of them even emailed Brian Oshea at White Pine to complain, and he forwarded
> his comments to Streak, and this is why he took the page down.

And I guess its to no one's surprise that this would be White Pine's
stance on this issue. I guess you cant blame WP; I'm sure for awhile at
least, Adult Entertainment places will be a big share of their
customers. Not that WP would even be aware of this nor condone it. (
Kinda like the GLAD company - they didnt intend for their product to be
used by dope dealers)

> Streak never
> wanted to make anyone angry with this...he only wanted to give us CU users
> another tool with which to work/play.

And he did a great job too. I REALLY wish those of you who know Streak
would see if he'd like to reconsider the whole matter.

thanks for hearing me out on this issue.