The Un-Official Proxomitron Forum

http://prxbx.com/paFileDB/index.php?act=category&id=9

http://prxbx.com/downloads.php?id=proxomitron

I've left no stone unturned in my search for all of Scott's work.

It seems as though he started with Proxomitron Naoko-2. I can't find any evidence of there ever being a Proxomitron Naoko-1.

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.arch...urce&hl=en

Thus began Proxomitron Naoko.

His site through the years:

Members.Tripod.Com/Proxomitron

Proxomitron.CJB.Net

Proxomitron.org

I'm saddened to announce that http://www.proxomitron.org has expired. Is it possible for a Proxomitron user to renew it and save it from domain harvesters?

Anyways, through my intensive Internet search, I came across Scott's first message, clearly excited, about uploading Proxomitron Naoko-2 to Simtel.net. I also came across his last message.

Scott, a Shonen Knight

Paul's Message

Scott was born in January 1968. He passed at the age of 36.

RIP
Scott R. Lemmon
May 1st, 2004

I vow to keep Proxomitron alive for as long as I live, even if it becomes outdated. Your generosity and selflessness has inspired me, and many others.

Apparently proxomitron.org has already been taken. Was it anyone here, or should I put down to nab it the moment it becomes free?

Kevin

http://www.dnsstuff.com/tools/whois.ch?i...mitron.org

Expiration Date:08-Nov-2006 06:11:03 UTC

Seems to still be registered to Scott Lemmon. And it seems I was wrong, it doesn't expire until the 8th of November next year.

I'm not sure whether or not it's right to nab it as basically it belongs to Scott's family now.

Kye-U Wrote:http://www.dnsstuff.com/tools/whois.ch?i...mitron.org

Expiration Date:08-Nov-2006 06:11:03 UTC

Seems to still be registered to Scott Lemmon. And it seems I was wrong, it doesn't expire until the 8th of November next year.

I'm not sure whether or not it's right to nab it as basically it belongs to Scott's family now.

Well, you may not have been wrong - the record was updated 9 Nov 2005. Someone keeping it alive on an annual basis?

Domain ID:D79463097-LROR
Domain Name:PROXOMITRON.ORG
Created On:08-Nov-2001 06:11:03 UTC
Last Updated On:09-Nov-2005 01:31:25 UTC
Expiration Date:08-Nov-2006 06:11:03 UTC
Sponsoring Registrar:TierraNet Inc. dba DomainDiscover (R86-LROR)
Status:CLIENT TRANSFER PROHIBITED
Registrant ID:TNTN-0000090650
Registrant Name:Scott Lemmon
Registrant Organization:Scott Lemmon
Registrant Street1:2121 Gillis St
Registrant Street2:
Registrant Street3:
Registrant City:Palatka
Registrant State/Province:FL
Registrant Postal Code:32177
Registrant Country:US
Registrant Phone:+1.9043290390
Registrant Phone Ext.:
Registrant FAX:
Registrant FAX Ext.:
Registrant Email:srldns@yahoo.com.hk
Admin ID:TNTN-0000090650
Admin Name:Scott Lemmon
Admin Organization:Scott Lemmon
Admin Street1:2121 Gillis St
Admin Street2:
Admin Street3:
Admin City:Palatka
Admin State/Province:FL
Admin Postal Code:32177
Admin Country:US
Admin Phone:+1.9043290390
Admin Phone Ext.:
Admin FAX:
Admin FAX Ext.:
Admin Email:srldns@yahoo.com.hk
Tech ID:TNTN-0000090650
Tech Name:Scott Lemmon
Tech Organization:Scott Lemmon
Tech Street1:2121 Gillis St
Tech Street2:
Tech Street3:
Tech City:Palatka
Tech State/Province:FL
Tech Postal Code:32177
Tech Country:US
Tech Phone:+1.9043290390
Tech Phone Ext.:
Tech FAX:
Tech FAX Ext.:
Tech Email:srldns@yahoo.com.hk
Name Server:EXPIRED3.DOMAINSUPPORT.NET
Name Server:EXPIRED4.DOMAINSUPPORT.NET
Name Server:
Name Server:
Name Server:
Name Server:
Name Server:
Name Server:
Name Server:
Name Server:
Name Server:
Name Server:
Name Server:

Anyway, here's the first version of the webpage:

http://web.archive.org/web/2001112910465...itron.org/

The links still work, including to an archived version of Arne's forum

and here's the archives of proxomitron.cjb.net

http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www....on.cjb.net

As for how far the program goes back, I vaguely recall running across the program in a little booklet issued by The Public Domain Software Library:

http://www.pdsl.com/

Now my memory may be playing tricks, but I'm fairly sure it was before Windows 95 came out. Their first webpage was in 1999, though they've been going since 1983. You could check with them when they first stocked Proxomitron, and which version it was. I'm pretty sure that they'll have an archive.

Meanwhile. when I have time, I'll have a look through the ancient floppies I've got lying around somewhere, and also see if I've still got any PDSL pamphlets around still.

That lot do you? :-)

Kevin

I'm thinking his family probably renews it.

But I'm not sure why it's showing that "renew" page instead of the message Scott put up.

Kye-U;

Kye-U Wrote:I'm thinking his family probably renews it.

But I'm not sure why it's showing that "renew" page instead of the message Scott put up.

Perhaps because they don't have the password, or they don't have the expertise/time/desire to move it to another host.

It would be nice to be able to contact them. What do you think would happen if someone just wrote to the Admin address in the Registrar record? (The physical one, not the email one.)

Oh, and nice compilation, thanks!


Oddysey

Paul of CastleCops was very close to Scott, and apparently keeps in touch with his family.

Thanks, Kye_U. Very nice collection. I downloaded and installed the first version in wine ... just to try it out.

Scott's work is amazing. Using Proxomitron really changed the way I look at the web (in more ways than one) ... it's a very liberating experience.

Kye-U Wrote:http://74.53.146.215/paFileDB/pafiledb.p...egory&id=9

http://prxbx.com/downloads.php?id=proxomitron

I've left no stone unturned in my search for all of Scott's work.

I vow to keep Proxomitron alive for as long as I live, even if it becomes outdated. Your generosity and selflessness has inspired me, and many others.

Great effort here Kye-U on this Complete Collection of Proxomitron.

On a different subject, but in my mind in keeping with what you have done on this thread, whatever you can do with your 32768 seek/change patch to maintain the integrity of SRL's work while solving the issue at hand and to stay in sync with your historical repository of proxo versions would be worth while IMO.

I've read JJoe's comments on the 32768 thread and feel

1) modified date is important (currently your patch keeps same date, it should pick up the date modified IMO afterall if you used a hex editor and saved your changes a new modified date would be saved).

2) some comment should be added to the patched exe to indicate it is a patched version and a brief summary of why. (I know you have it in your reference info you link to but JMO agree with JJoe on this item too).

I would have added this to the other thread, but considering the good work you have done here, felt this was a better place to remember the importance of maintaining the integrity of the original proxo.exe even when patched.

Nice job again on this thread & the patch...

3 attaboys to you, jjoe and mike on the patch

Thanks Peakaboo

I've taken down the patch since I do not have the time to work on a patch that adds a blub to the About section of Proxomitron, and perhaps I won't upload it again. (Due to lack of time, and lack of knowledge in copyright issues).

Kye-U;

You're probably correct, at least in the eyes of the law, in removing a patched version from the database. No point in waking up the slumbering bear.

However, there's nothing wrong with doing what Henk does, and that is, issue a program that modifies an executable file. So long as you take full credit for it, and not try to pass it off as Scott's work, you should be OK, legally speaking. I envision either an exe, or possibly a batch file, or even just a text file that explains how to do the process, any method should be workable. The level of complexity is up to you.


Oddysey

Peakaboo;

Quote:.......
I've read JJoe's comments on the 32768 thread and feel

1) modified date is important (currently your patch keeps same date, it should pick up the date modified IMO afterall if you used a hex editor and saved your changes a new modified date would be saved).

2) some comment should be added to the patched exe to indicate it is a patched version and a brief summary of why. (I know you have it in your reference info you link to but JMO agree with JJoe on this item too).

Modifying a file can be done in two ways, with a hex editor, or with a byte-level disc editor. Examples of the former are programs that load the file into memory, do the dirty deed, and then call the OS to write the memory buffers back out to the disc - obviously, the OS writes a new time/date stamp. The oldest program of this type in the Intel/Microsoft world is either Debug or Edlin, take your choice. (They were both available in DOS 1.0.) Many others have come and gone since, some staying into the Windows world, most not. Norton Editor is one of the few that made the jump from DOS to Windows, and remains even unto today. My personal favorite is MED, but lotsa folks like Ultra, Crystal, and others like them.

However, in recent years, Norton has also become an example of a byte level disc (or sector) editor. In the Norton Utilities suite, that would be Norton Disk Editor. Using this program bypasses the OS entirely - the modified data is written back out to the disc by Norton itself, and the time/date stamp is not changed. Again, many programs have come and gone that do this, and I'm certainly not the one to name them all.

Given what we just said in the previous post, it would probably be a non-sequitur to worry about the time/date stamp. If a person chooses to "update" his/her Proxo exe file, that's fine, but they shouldn't make it available for d/l by others - just too much risk, as I pointed out to Kye-U. Besides, if you know you patched your file on your machine, do you really need to have a different time/date, just to remind you of this factoid?

And if you do, then feel free to change the time/date yourself. Here's how: open a CLI (that's command line interface, or DOS box), and make sure you're in the Proxo directory. Issue this command: Don't put any spaces between the name, the plus sign, and the two commas. You may have to put the file name in quotes, it'll depend on your OS version.


Oddysey

Oddysey,

What you said was fine re:time/date stamp.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this point

my point reflects when the change was truly made.

circumventing the time/stamp process in my eyes does not reflect reality, however I recognize some do not care about reality and also different people perceive reality differently.

I am very comfortable with what I said even after reading your reality.

Peakaboo;

Well, what I said did look more to the idea of taking the easy way out.

However, what I said about the on-disk editors has a reality in that I was explaining why some programs don't change the time/date stamp - they literally can't, as they are bypassing the OS to make their mods - they write directly to the disk. In order to reduce the chances of blowing everything all to hell and gone, they don't do that anymore than absolutely necessary.

I'm sure they could easily include a routine to modify the t/d stamp too, it's just that this info is not part of the file, it's part of the OS's file system. That's definitely a high-risk territory to be treading without the OS's permission and guidance.


Oddysey

The registration has lapsed and is now up for sale by some domain broker in Oregon. How did this happen so soon? How quickly people forget.