Traveller-digest    Thursday, September 16 1999    Volume 1999 : Number 1099



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

test, please ignore
Re: X-TEK corporate profile and old ISBA site
Subsidized Merchants and Fighters
Re: A Vargr question
RE: A Vargr question
Re: THUDDD and GURPS/Traveller TLs
Re: GIF's & copyright
Re: GIF's & copyright
RE: Standards of Beauty
RE: A Vargr question
Re: A Vargr question
Re: Pagan buys WOTC Shock
World Builder Deluxe
Re: World Builder Deluxe
Re: Subsidized Merchants and Fighters
[none]
Re: Subsidized Merchants and Fighters
Re: GIF's & copyright
Ares Magazine request!!!
Re: OT: Moon Blasted Out of Orbit.

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

Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 14:08:19 -0600
From: Erwin Fritz <efritz@GLJA.com>
Subject: test, please ignore

test only
- -- 
Erwin Fritz
Gilbert Laustsen Jung Associates Ltd.
http://www.glja.com

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

Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 14:25:29 -0700
From: "Jason T. Barnabas" <cybernaut@netzero.net>
Subject: Re: X-TEK corporate profile and old ISBA site

William Prankard <cmdrx@magicnet.net> wrote:


>I found the old ISBA site.  I don't know if Tim is still doing anything
>with it.  It looks grossly outdated.
>
>http://www.premier.net/~tim/zimiinmain/isba/isba.htm

Thanks, I've not heard anything from Tim concerning 
it, so I downloaded the stuff you found and may adapt/
update it later.

BTW, the reason I posted this reply to all three lists 
was the hopes that Tim Reynolds might still be 
receiving one of them and drop me 
<cybernaut@netzero.net> a line.

>Also, I'd like to have my company profile up on the new site.  Mind you it
>has been 'updated' for use with the G:T timeline, but most of the
>original info is still there.
>
>http://magicnet.net/~cmdrx/xtek/corppfl.htm

Thank you for the registry data.  Your key code will be 
XTC.

>I will be submitting my lifeboat design in the next post.
>
>Or will we be using an on line submission form? Now that I re-read the
>last email.  Will key-codes be send by email to us?  Interesting system.
>In the old days we just mailed the designs.

That's why it has been over a year since the 
completion of THUDDD 8.  Every time I can automate 
the process, it lengthens the time remaining before 
you need to find a new THUDDD coordinator.  (If you 
don't believe me, ask the last one.)

>Let me know what's up, I'm ready to submit! :)

Programming has commenced and should be 
completed before the end of the dead-line.
- --
Sincerely,

Jason Barnabas





________________________________________________________
NetZero - We believe in a FREE Internet.  Shouldn't you?
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html

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

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 01:11:51 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: Subsidized Merchants and Fighters

In both CT and T4, subsidized merchant ships must be armed to qualify
for the subsidy (or at least the mail route associated with the
subsidy).  By this, I assume that defensive-only mounts such as
sandcasters do not constitute armament, but point-defense lasers are
considered armament, as they can conceivably inflict damage on small
attackers.  My question is:

Does carrying an armed small craft on an otherwise-unarmed ship count as
being armed? 

- -- 
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776

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

Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 16:39:55 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: A Vargr question

>Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 14:02:23 -0400
>From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@accesstoledo.com>
>Considering that current theory is, they're all descended from wolves to
>begin with and can *still* crossbreed with them without having sterile
>offspring, yeah.  From what I gather, the base DNA hasn't changed in the
>last 20, 30 thousand years, just some of the 'cosmetic' stuff.

Be careful here.  Remember that, in the broad genetic sweep of life
all multicellular organisms can be said to be first cousins.  To many
bacteria (or even a amoeba, which is in the same domain as mammals)
you and a mushroom are almost the same organism with only "cosmetic"
changes.
______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)

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

Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 16:32:49 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: RE: A Vargr question

Tue, 14 Sep 1999 13:15:18 -0400, Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca>

>David Summers writes:
>>Vargr are descendent from "canine stock", not dogs.  (Just like
>>human are descendent from "primate stock" rather than from
>>any contemporary primates species.)  The do, as you point out,
>>have an artificial genetic distance from their ancestors too.

>	Your point is well taken. I am not very familiar with the
>	canon history of the Vargr, but I seem to remember that
>	they originated about 300,000 years ago (humans and chimps
>	have descended from a common ancestor that lived about 3-5
>	million years ago). IMTU, the first Vargr started at TL 0.
>	What does canon suggest (did they work up their own tech)?

From memory...

Genetically (there is now way to trace by fossil record) they are
derived from "canine" stock in general.  It may be that the Ancients
mixed genes from different stock.  They do not appear to be decendent
from any extant canine species (just like humans aren't descendent
from any extant primate species).

They also did start at TL 0.  I think the Ancients deliberately
started them at this TL and then watched there evolution (they weren't
as appears to be true for humans, "pets" or "workers").
______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)

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

Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 10:37:33 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: THUDDD and GURPS/Traveller TLs

>Thanks for the info.  I have it ready to post and I'll get to it later.
>Until further notice, all Tech Level maximums will be given in standard
>Traveller TLs.

Is there any reason you just can't give both?  Though I would guess
it would make the most sense to give them for the design system used
to make up a ship.
______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)

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

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 01:25:36 -0400
From: "Terry Carlino" <carlino@home.com>
Subject: Re: GIF's & copyright

>If you're ideological opposed to a company getting its proper due for
>developing a standard format that has proven itself amazingly useful for
the
>storage and transfer of indexed color images, well go right ahead. Frankly,
>I'll keep my GIFs, and I'll smack down any punk that comes along and tries
>to smoke 'em. ;)

I have no problem with a company getting it's proper due for software which
they have produced. I have a big problem with a company patenting an
algorithm after it has been publish in the public domain, by it's
originator. Like DNA and several other technologies that the U.S. government
is issuing patents on I believe that there are some things that shouldn't be
owned. No one should be able to patent the Pythagorean theorem or copyright
the color red.

As I understand it Unisys got control of the patent when Sperry Rand merged
with Burroughs in 1986.  It was based on information theory published in the
seventies.  Years after the method was widely known a patent was applied for
and about 5 years after that the patent office approved it.  By that time
the compression method was already widely used.

Unisys has every legal right to charge a fee to utilize their patented
compression technology. Whether their request should have been approved by
the patent office is another story.


Terry C

All that is Gold does not glitter
Not all who travel are lost

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

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 01:33:54 -0400
From: "Terry Carlino" <carlino@home.com>
Subject: Re: GIF's & copyright

I'm so ashamed :( I gorgot my OBtrav, in my last message.

OBTravller:Patent law in the 1st Imperium in held to have slowed
technological progress down to a crawl. Combined with the problems of
banking and administration it helped to bring down the ROM. It seems to me
that almost all technological development in the OTU is either done by the
IN or other Imperial ministry, who must not be subject to Patent law, or in
secret by MegaCorps, who are probably breaking the letter of the law by
engaging in research. After all there is almost no way to improve something,
even something you hold the rights to, without taking a concept from another
field or technology to do it.

For example: I own the patent on refrigerators. I want to make them more
efficient through using some kind of embedded processor. Have I violated the
rights of the owner of the processor patent if I modify the processor to
work better for my application?

Terry C

All that is Gold does not glitter
Not all who travel are lost

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

Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 18:14:02 -0400
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca>
Subject: RE: Standards of Beauty

Bruce Johnson writes:
>What you're missing here is the reason for why the population
>restrictions evolved into the species. (and familiarity with wolf and
>canid biology)

	I agree, though I can speculate on the former.

>Wolves, as large pack-hunting carnivorous mammals sit on the very top of
>the food chain...and typically need a large territory to support their
>population, menaing lower population densities.

	Generally speaking, carnivores require lots of room, 'warm-
	blooded' carnivores in particular. Of course, if some of
	their diet is plant material they may need a little less
	room, but there is no denying that a large carnivorous
	mammal will tend to live at low densities.

>On the _average_ only the dominant pack members breed. In good years,
>however, females lower on the heirarchy do breed. This is how packs
>multiply when food supplies are abundant, by having more females breed
>rather than increasing litter size. In very lean years, even the alphas
>don't breed. 

	As you pointed out, I don't know a lot about wolf biology,
	but think about this: how many young can an alpha female
	produce per year? According to a site that turned up with
	a quick web-search, 3-10 is typical. The same site lists
	8-35 individuals per pack, and 2 years to maturity. Even
	if only the alpha female reproduces, this is likely to
	result in much faster population increase than in, say,
	humans. Even if only one female reproduces (with higher
	success because she is aided by her pack, and because her
	young do not have to compete with so many cousins), the
	pack could respond to increased resources faster than us,
	without having to rely on other females. Once again, I am
	not claiming that only the alphas breed, I am only
	suggesting that it is conceivable that it might be so.

>OTOH, wildlife biologists really don't have a completely firm grasp on
>how wolves do things, because as long as systematic studies have been
>carried out, it has been on populations that were under enormous
>stresses: we've been busy wiping out the majority of the wolf population
>on this continent for a very long time. 

	Very good point. Wolf behaviour patterns probably evolved
	under different conditions than those under which many 
	live today. Those patterns have had little time to
	change, however.

>There are only a few places left where wolves exhibit 'normal' behavior,
>and these are probably the most marginal areas of their original ranges.
>
>For instance...what were wolf breeding patterns back when the American
>Great Plains were the Serengeti of North America, with vast herds of
>ungulates for a food supply, and mild winters (presuming the wolves
>followed the migrating herds)? We haven't a _clue_ other than some poor
>anecdotal evidence.

	And the wolves themselves...

<snipped>
>So, actually, IMO a freer breeding pattern would be the norm in a canid
>poulation that has, as a high tech Vargr society does, unlimited food
>supplies.

	Perhaps so, although human birth rate has declined 
	drastically in 'developed' countries.

>And highly restrictive breeding patterns _is_ detrimental to the
>development of a high tech society...you don't get the free time to
>develop technology until you have a regular surplus of food; you don't
>have that until you develop agriculture, you don't have _that_ unless
>you can breed enough workers to work the fields. 

	Just think of all the free time that you would have if you
	didn't have to worry about reproducing all the time...

	Vargr 1: How did humans ever develop technologies, with
		theirrr constant prrreocupation with prrrocrrreation?

	Vargr 2: They must have had an alpha-female system initially,
		orrr they would neverrr have had time to!

<snipped>

Peez

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

Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 17:39:07 -0400
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca>
Subject: RE: A Vargr question

Keven Pittsinger writes:
>Perhaps homo neanderthal was Grandfather's main human assistants, and
>homo sapiens was a mutation.  Nonetheless, neanderthal became extinct.
>And I don't see any evidence suggesting he *wasn't* helped.  <grin>

	It is also possible that neanderthals did not go extinct,
	but rather evolved into us. Human geneology is pretty
	vague.

>>Just by being "dogs" they are *much* modified from the base form. After
>>all, selective breeding for the last 20-30 thousand years is going to
>>have *quite* an effect.
>Considering that current theory is, they're all descended from wolves to
>begin with and can *still* crossbreed with them without having sterile
>offspring, yeah.  From what I gather, the base DNA hasn't changed in the
>last 20, 30 thousand years, just some of the 'cosmetic' stuff.  >Selective
breeding doesn't *really* create new species, just new >subspecies still
interfertile with the parent species.  Of course, with >recombinant DNA
techniques, we're beginning to have the capability of >changing all that...

	It is hard to draw a distinction between 'cosmetic' stuff
	and 'base DNA.' Studies have shown that the differences 
	between individuals, the differences between populations,
	the differences between subspecies, and the differences
	between species are of the same type, just not the same
	degree. Thus, there is no reason to think that selective
	breeding cannot result in reproductive isolation. It just
	takes time.

Peez

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

Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 18:20:21 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: Re: A Vargr question

At 11:54 PM 9/13/99 PST, you wrote:
>> separate branch of primates. So while we are related to the apes,
we
>> are not their direct evolutionary descendants.
>
>To be exact, humans, chimps, and gorillas share a common ancestor
2-3
>million years back. And we share a *lot* of DNA. So much so that
>cross-fertilization between humans and chimps may be possible,
though
>not likely.

	Not likely is bloody right. Ain't that much drug drug in the
Imperium ...

- -- "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" 
   -- Mahatma Gandhi

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

Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 14:53:49
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Pagan buys WOTC Shock

At 07:50 AM 9/14/1999 +0100, you wrote:
>This is from the latest Chaosium DIgest. I couldn't resist it after all the
>recent gossip.

G5od BLAst it@ Dom!  ThEsE keyb00rds r E33pensive!
- -- 

Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html

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

Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 23:40:17 -0700
From: --M <mitch@sirius.com>
Subject: World Builder Deluxe

    Maybe someone coud help me out I have ben running a PBE campaign with group whose job it is to take a census at worlds in the marches. I have having them gather very detailed system info as they go along. I have been generating this info with the World Builder software. I don't understand some of the information.

    First what is PBG: 323?

    Second what is the number preceding planetary Satellite. For example I created the following system listing, the numbers I am reffering to are 5 (jenghe), 7 (Satellite 2), 35 (Satellite 3) etc.
    Third when I look at the listing for the first gas giant it listed as size C, does this correspond to diameter? Is there a table for gas giant diameters?
    Last of there seems to be lots of life in this system and the what seems to be very unlikely places. For eaxmple,

12 Satellite 5   F201663-8 -- has millions of inhabitants?
       I assume this part of the random generated system and some creative explaining or some fudging.

0  Gas Giant   XC00000-8
    5 Jenghe    C799663-9
    7 Satellite 2   G420560-8
    35 Satellite 3   F320560-8
    200 Satellite 4   Y405000-8
    12 Satellite 5   F201663-8
    40 Satellite 6  F62A523-8
    8 Satellite 7   F212630-8
    4 Satellite 8   F100360-8
    30 Satellite 9   F366660-8
    3 Satellite 10  GS00760-8
1  Gas Giant   XC00000-8
    11 Satellite 1   F700360-8
    15 Satellite 2   F410360-8
    9 Satellite 3   H100000-8
    45 Satellite 4   Y200000-8
2  Other World   G200563-8
    10 Satellite 1   GS00234-8
    1 Satellite 2   HR00000-8
3  Asteroid/Planetoid Belt X000000-8
4  Other World   F300000-8
     7 Satellite 1   YS00160-8
5  Asteroid/Planetoid Belt X000000-8
6  Gas Giant   XC00000-8
    6 Satellite 1   YS00000-8
     11 Satellite 2   F400363-8
     20 Satellite 3   Y200000-8
     9 Satellite 4   YR00000-8
     13 Satellite 5   YS00000-8
     7 Satellite 6   Y200160-8

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

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 02:59:47 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: Re: World Builder Deluxe

- --M wrote:
> 
>     Maybe someone coud help me out I have ben running a PBE campaign with group whose job it is to take a census at worlds in the marches. I have having them gather very detailed system info as they go along. I have been generating this info with the World Builder software. I don't understand some of the information.
> 
>     First what is PBG: 323?

This probably refers to the following:

P:  Population multiplier (multiply the base population for a given
universal planetary profile by this figure, to get the actual
population)

B:  Belts (the number of planetoid belts in the system)

G:  Gas Giants (the number of gas giants in the system)

Thus, PBG: 323 means that, given a base population of (for example) 6,
the system in question would have an actual population of 3,000,000 (3 x
10^6).  It would also have 2 significant [usable as resources] planetoid
belts, and 3 gas giants.

> 
>     Second what is the number preceding planetary Satellite. For example I created the following system listing, the numbers I am reffering to are 5 (jenghe), 7 (Satellite 2), 35 (Satellite 3) etc.

Durned if I know.  It seems to refer to the satellite's orbit, as it
relates to the system's habitable zone, but don't quote me on that....

The rest of your questions seem to deal with information not covered in
Book 6, nor in any T4 materials, so I won't address them.

<<snip>>

- -- 
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776

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

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 09:22:55 +0100
From: Phil Kitching <postmark.design@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Subsidized Merchants and Fighters

At 01:11 15/09/1999 -0500, Black ICE <wombat@premier.net> wrote:

>Does carrying an armed small craft on an otherwise-unarmed ship count as
>being armed? 

I don't see why not.

However, since the weapons are presumably to deter attackers (this isn't
a Q-ship) I don't think that putting a figheter in the cargo bay will count.

You'd need a dedicated hangar, but I'd suggest external grapples so
that everyone knows you have a fighter.

(The authorities will be very unhappy if they find that you have put the
 fighter in a crate or left it behind and used the hangar for cargo space.
 Just like they be unhappy if the normal subbie stoped employing turret
 gunners.)

Phil Kitching
- --
  http://www.btinternet.com/~salvo/
  Postmark Design Bureau, Emerging Technologies Division.
 "Microwaving half-baked ideas from across the Galaxy"

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

Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 17:12:15 -0500
From: "John Majer" <jsmage@earthlink.net>
Subject: [none]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

- ------=_NextPart_000_0038_01BEFED4.4A9D57A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

unsubscribe traveller-digest



- ------=_NextPart_000_0038_01BEFED4.4A9D57A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>unsubscribe=20
traveller-digest<BR><BR></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

- ------=_NextPart_000_0038_01BEFED4.4A9D57A0--

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

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 10:01:07 -0300
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca>
Subject: Re: Subsidized Merchants and Fighters

At 01:11 AM 15/09/1999 -0500, you wrote:
>In both CT and T4, subsidized merchant ships must be armed to qualify
>for the subsidy (or at least the mail route associated with the
>subsidy).  By this, I assume that defensive-only mounts such as
>sandcasters do not constitute armament, but point-defense lasers are
>considered armament, as they can conceivably inflict damage on small
>attackers.  My question is:
>
>Does carrying an armed small craft on an otherwise-unarmed ship count as
>being armed? 
>

        Given what I have seen for fighter-pilot life expectancy in CT
sessions I have played, no.  Fighters get mission-killed *very* quickly by
critical hits due to size vs wpn USP.  One Patrol cruiser can mission kill
four fighters per round, quite easily.

        --Michel

	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-
	Michel R. Vaillancourt	misha@atlantic-online.ns.ca
				ICQ # 31172292
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-
	    NET-City Communications....
	         Providing "Solutions for the Common Company"
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-
	***REMEMBER - Always virus-check your emails ***
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-

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

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 07:48:45 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: GIF's & copyright

Terry Carlino wrote:
> 
> I'm so ashamed :( I gorgot my OBtrav, in my last message.
> 
> OBTravller:Patent law in the 1st Imperium in held to have slowed
> technological progress down to a crawl. Combined with the problems of
> banking and administration it helped to bring down the ROM. It seems to me
> that almost all technological development in the OTU is either done by the
> IN or other Imperial ministry, who must not be subject to Patent law, or in
> secret by MegaCorps, who are probably breaking the letter of the law by
> engaging in research. After all there is almost no way to improve something,
> even something you hold the rights to, without taking a concept from another
> field or technology to do it.

In the OTU, nothing I've ever seen indicates that they use Vilani-style IP
laws. More likely, the OTU TL advance is slowed because of the sheer size of
the OTU, and a different design and manufacturing philosophy. Given that
starships that are 70 years old are still worth a lot, I suspect a 'built to
last' philosophy holds sway over the durable goods sector, keeping TL changes
slow. I'll bet the average TL of novelty or other more ephemeral items is
generally higher throughout the Imperium. It's just that a system's TL is
_such_ a broad brush, the fact that they still make their starships at TL-13
simply drowns out the fact they're making Tl-16 toys.

The other thing holding down TL advances in the OTU, imo, is that the IN
doesn't want to change all that fast, so they can maintain an effective
logistics structure _throughout_ the Imperium. Having a TL-16 starship isn't
much use if you're stuck out in the boonies with some TL-13 manufacturing
plants manking parts locally.

> For example: I own the patent on refrigerators. I want to make them more
> efficient through using some kind of embedded processor. Have I violated the
> rights of the owner of the processor patent if I modify the processor to
> work better for my application?

You would, in RL, be considered a crazy person. Most companies would just
approach the chip manufacturer and say, 'could you make these changes for me?
I guarantee if you do, I'll buy x million of them.' It's done all the time; in
fact, chip manufacturers often advertise their willingness to modify the
designs exclusively for a specific customer, if that customer is big enough.

You make refrigerators, not chips. You _buy_ chips.

If you _are_ in the same general line of business, ie: you make embedded
processors for refrigeration, and company y makes embedded processors for
automobiles, if you modify company y's chip to make better refrigerator chips,
you better either license it, or have a battalion of good lawyers handy. (And
given what can be done in the OTU between consenting Megacorps) maybe you
should round up a few battalions, too.

However, I suspect also, that a lot of IP in the OTU is condidered Trade
Secrets, and is not patented. This is a GOOD THING. It leads to all sorts of
fun opportunities for the PC's to get in a little industrial espionage. ;-) It
also justifies trade war between Megas much more than mere territory disputes.

If Mega X steals the designs for SuperChip from Mega Y, Mega Y may not want to
bring it up into court, because then they have to prove that Mega X's design
is stolen from theirs, which means revealing that design in court. Open court
or not, this is still showing off the corporate family jewels. 

Simply blowing up Mega X's chip manufacturing plants, stealing their cargoes,
etc may be enough to get Mega X to cry Uncle and either pay Mega Y a
bucketload of money for the SuperChip or quit making it. (and transferring all
the techs and engineers who worked on it, their staff, their records, etc,
etc, etc to Mega Y. Hows THAT for a hostile takeover! 'Chief Design Engineer
Dilbertii, you are now a corporate prisoner of war.' :-)

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

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 10:47:57 CDT
From: Don McKinney <dmckinne@itds.com>
Subject: Ares Magazine request!!!

This is an obscure request for some collector out there...

Does anyone have a copy of the Ares magazine article about Far Frontiers
sector I could get a photocopy of?


DonM.
- --
========================================================================
= Donald E. McKinney, Lead ConfigMgt Engineer        dmckinne@itds.com =
= International Telecommunications Data Systems         (217) 239-8365 =
= 2109 Fox Drive, Champaign, IL                         (217) 351-8250 =
= Winter War 27 Convention Chairman, Champaign, IL, February 4-6, 2000 =
= winterwar@prairienet.org        http://www.prairienet.org/winterwar/ = 
========================================================================

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

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 08:28:33 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: OT: Moon Blasted Out of Orbit.

In mail you write:

>>    Today the moon was blasted out of Earth's orbit, apparently due to a
>>mammoth explosion on the Lunar surface.
>
> Accompanied by a funky guitar line and the BBC Radiophonic Workshop.

The Sci-Fi channel *really* missed a bet here. They could have shown
the first episode of Space:1999 "as it happened". :-)

In fact, it'd be nice to have a list of various "future" events from SF
stories (and the occasional "mainstream" book/movie) that are "going to
happen" in the 2000-2050 time frame. 

If there were enough, we could talk the Sci-Fi channel into a "regular
special", say with a title along the lines of "Futures Past". :-)

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

End of Traveller-digest V1999 #1099
***********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe
"local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
