The future of Usenet (if any?)
JDG43
Recent announcements have disquieted me:
- Many ISPs have shut down their News services
- Microsoft has ceased to support its Newsgroups
- Microsoft doesn't any more deliver a News client under Windows 7
- Neither does Apple (since several years) under MacOS.
Under such circumstances, does Usenet still have a future?
With the main OSs now "News-client-less" (with the sole exception of
good brave Linux, but it's in the minority), there remain only, as News
clients available, maintained and upgraded, those from "third party"
suppliers (e.g. Mozilla Thunderbird and Opera (both multi-OS),
NewsWatcher (under MacOS), etc.). Do these laudable "third parties"
believe in the future of Usenet, or are they just fighting a rear-guard
action doomed to a final defeat?
AMHA I would miss Usenet - very much - if it would disappear: the
current News clients have - with some exceptions - simple and robust
user interfaces, and by their "plain text only" constraint they force a
high signal-to-noise ratio in the messages (well, there are spammers and
trollers, but where don't they plague the world?).
In comparison, the Web info servers (often heralded as the successors of
Usenet) have a low signal-to-noise ratio (on each page, at least 10
times more useless crap than useful info), more often than not a
far-from-intuitive user interface - if not faulty altogether, and many
are poorly maintained by their owners.
In addition, I greatly appreciate the excellent service of
eternal-september (many thanks, Ray and your team!). I don't know of
many Web info services that provide so high a quality.
leonard hofstadter
> On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 16:25:53 +0200, Joe N. wrote:
>
>> Google Groups has announced a new interface:
>> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!overview>
>>
>> I've not investigated the UI so far, but at least Google didn't forget
>> about Usenet, which is a surprise to me.
>
> You trust Google to support Usenet? Ha! They're only interested in their
> own Google Discussion Groups, not in Usenet newsgroups. They totally
> ruined Deja News' archive...
>
/tinfoil hat on
google only tapped into usenet to archive everything, google only
exists to track and archive everything on the interwebs :-P
/tinfoil hat off
Stanimir Stamenkov
> Google Groups has announced a new interface:
> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!overview>
>
> I've not investigated the UI so far, but at least Google didn't forget
> about Usenet, which is a surprise to me.
This new Google interface appears to totally screw threading in
newsgroups failing to send appropriate 'References' header.
--
Stanimir
RayBanana
> Google Groups has announced a new interface:
> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!overview>
>
> I've not investigated the UI so far, but at least Google didn't forget
> about Usenet, which is a surprise to me.
The common user interface is an intrinsic part of their strategy to blur the boundary between Usenet and Google Groups and position their own platform as the successor of Usenet.
> --
> "Everything that has a beginning has an end."
> (from Matrix III)
and how can I tell it not to quote signatures?
--
SCNR
Ray Banana
> Reply-To: eternal-sept...@googlegroups.com
This is not correct. They are hijacking mail replies and redirect them
to their own groups.
--
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.
http://www.eternal-september.org
John from Detroit
> Thus spake RayBanana:
>
>> Reply-To: eternal-sept...@googlegroups.com
>
> This is not correct. They are hijacking mail replies and redirect them
> to their own groups.
>
I suspect that is true,, One of the major problems with Usenet is
criminal hackers have forced ISP after ISP to limit or restrict their
Usenet servers.. Thus only a few places, Like eternal-September, remain
open to those of us who wish to read/post legitimate usenet messages.
(Yes, this is a THANK YOU note)
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
> ... One of the major problems with Usenet is criminal hackers have
> forced ISP after ISP to limit or restrict their Usenet servers.. ...
That is not true, at least as far as U.S. ISPs are concerned. All the
major players were coerced into giving up Usenet servers by (then) New
York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo (now Governor). Rather than
purge out the 88 identified child pr0n groups, the ISPs opted to simply
turn them all off, thus using his political pressure to simply pull the
whole plug, save money/increase profits, and take away another service.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9964895-38.html
Back in 2008, we New Yorkers/Usenetters said "it's another campaign ploy
for the A.G.'s run for Governor." It must have worked ... :-(
--
-bts
-Four wheels carry the body; two wheels move the soul
Yo$$1960
> I've not investigated the UI so far, but at least Google didn't forget
> about Usenet, which is a surprise to me.
Google are, more often than not, the problem. Not the solution.
--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)rad never immediately apparent"
It's your life so go your own way
Questions And Answers - Sham 69
Mike Yetto
>I've not investigated the UI so far, but at least Google didn't forget
>about Usenet,
More's the pity.
>which is a surprise to me.
And a disappointment to others.
Mike "look how well GG and deja-google turned out" Yetto
--
In theory, theory and practice are the same.
In practice they are not.
Mike Yetto
>John from Detroit wrote:
>> ... One of the major problems with Usenet is criminal hackers have
>> forced ISP after ISP to limit or restrict their Usenet servers.. ...
>That is not true, at least as far as U.S. ISPs are concerned. All the
>major players were coerced into giving up Usenet servers by (then) New
>York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo (now Governor). Rather than
>purge out the 88 identified child pr0n groups, the ISPs opted to simply
>turn them all off, thus using his political pressure to simply pull the
>whole plug, save money/increase profits, and take away another service.
I don't think they were coerced into dropping 88 groups so much
as they were given an excuse to drop a value added, zero revenue
service.
>http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9964895-38.html
>Back in 2008, we New Yorkers/Usenetters said "it's another campaign ploy
>for the A.G.'s run for Governor." It must have worked ... :-(
Well, okay, I'll give you that.
Mike "but we're not cynical are we, BTS?" Yetto
impaul
Even the so-called no archive settings some people use, even if it
defeats the "go google the info" replies to questions/howtos?
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
> Beauregard T. Shagnasty writes:
>>John from Detroit wrote:
>>> ... One of the major problems with Usenet is criminal hackers have
>>> forced ISP after ISP to limit or restrict their Usenet servers..
>>
>> That is not true, at least as far as U.S. ISPs are concerned. All
>> the major players were coerced into giving up Usenet servers by
>> (then) New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo (now Governor).
>> Rather than purge out the 88 identified child pr0n groups, the ISPs
>> opted to simply turn them all off, thus using his political pressure
>> to simply pull the whole plug, save money/increase profits, and take
>> away another service.
>
> I don't think they were coerced into dropping 88 groups so much as
> they were given an excuse to drop a value added, zero revenue
> service.
Sorta what I said, innit? ;-)
"Find a way to get rid of those 88 groups, or face me in court!"
"Yessir, we're pullin' the plug."
(Snicker, snicker, counts newfound profits...)
>> http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9964895-38.html
>
>> Back in 2008, we New Yorkers/Usenetters said "it's another campaign
>> ploy for the A.G.'s run for Governor." It must have worked ... :-(
>
> Well, okay, I'll give you that.
>
> Mike "but we're not cynical are we, BTS?" Yetto
Not atoll. I might even still be posting via att.net if ol' Andrew had
found another campaign issue... or not - at&t sucks greater than ever
these days.
Mike Yetto
>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty writes:
>>>John from Detroit wrote:
>>>> ... One of the major problems with Usenet is criminal hackers have
>>>> forced ISP after ISP to limit or restrict their Usenet servers..
>>>
>>> That is not true, at least as far as U.S. ISPs are concerned. All
>>> the major players were coerced into giving up Usenet servers by
>>> (then) New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo (now Governor).
>>> Rather than purge out the 88 identified child pr0n groups, the ISPs
>>> opted to simply turn them all off, thus using his political pressure
>>> to simply pull the whole plug, save money/increase profits, and take
>>> away another service.
>>
>> I don't think they were coerced into dropping 88 groups so much as
>> they were given an excuse to drop a value added, zero revenue
>> service.
>Sorta what I said, innit? ;-)
>"Find a way to get rid of those 88 groups, or face me in court!"
>"Yessir, we're pullin' the plug."
>(Snicker, snicker, counts newfound profits...)
If you consider that the ISPs are protected by the DMCA safe
harbour provisions and many that complied were not even in New
York, the rush to "think of the children" begs the question.
>>> http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9964895-38.html
>>
>>> Back in 2008, we New Yorkers/Usenetters said "it's another campaign
>>> ploy for the A.G.'s run for Governor." It must have worked ... :-(
>>
>> Well, okay, I'll give you that.
>>
>> Mike "but we're not cynical are we, BTS?" Yetto
>Not atoll. I might even still be posting via att.net if ol' Andrew had
>found another campaign issue... or not - at&t sucks greater than ever
>these days.
Well, at least he's not adding any untoward tax burden on those
defenseless million/billionaires. The thousandaires can handle
the burden.
Mike "then go for the hundredaires" Yetto
Barry Margolin
<jdg43.filtre.anti.pollut...@62-183-169-81.bb.dnai
nternet.fi>,
JDG43 <jdg43.filtre....@tvtmail.ch.invalid> wrote:
> - Microsoft doesn't any more deliver a News client under Windows 7
> - Neither does Apple (since several years) under MacOS.
Did Apple EVER provide a news client? I don't think so.
--
Barry Margolin, bar...@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
> - Microsoft doesn't any more deliver a News client under Windows 7
Microsoft doesn't any more deliver an Email client under Windows 7
either.
Does this mean that Email is dead? <shudder>
--
-bts
-This poast is valid through December 21, 2012
Jay E. Morris
> JDG43 wrote:
>
>> - Microsoft doesn't any more deliver a News client under Windows 7
>
> Microsoft doesn't any more deliver an Email client under Windows 7
> either.
>
> Does this mean that Email is dead?<shudder>
>
Of course not. It's in the [stoner voice]c..l..o..u..d[/stoner voice].
Bruce Sinclair
>Joe N. wrote:
>> Google Groups has announced a new interface:
>> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!overview>
>>
>> I've not investigated the UI so far, but at least Google didn't forget
>> about Usenet, which is a surprise to me.
>
>The common user interface is an intrinsic part of their strategy to blur the
> boundary between Usenet and Google Groups and position their own platform as
> the successor of Usenet.
For those of us that remember the reality, and who are not foled by blurs,
it's not going to happen. :)
Bruce Sinclair
>On 4/30/2011 12:49 PM, Ray Banana wrote:
>> Thus spake RayBanana:
>>
>>> Reply-To: eternal-sept...@googlegroups.com
>>
>> This is not correct. They are hijacking mail replies and redirect them
>> to their own groups.
>I suspect that is true,, One of the major problems with Usenet is
>criminal hackers have forced ISP after ISP to limit or restrict their
>Usenet servers..
Really ? I thought that ISPs limited their news group coverage because 1)
people don't ask for it like they used to; 2) you need a dedicated server
and feed; 3) they are too ignorant to get it right (ie know nothing hell
desks and managers. :)
> Thus only a few places, Like eternal-September, remain
>open to those of us who wish to read/post legitimate usenet messages.
>
>(Yes, this is a THANK YOU note)
Seconded. Thanks Ray. :)
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
> John from Detroit wrote:
>> I suspect that is true,, One of the major problems with Usenet is
>> criminal hackers have forced ISP after ISP to limit or restrict
>> their Usenet servers..
>
> Really ? I thought that ISPs limited their news group coverage
> because
> 1) people don't ask for it like they used to;
> 2) you need a dedicated server and feed;
> 3) they are too ignorant to get it right (ie know nothing hell [sic]
> desks and managers. :)
While those facts are true (but not relevant to the topic), see:
0) See previous posts about government intervention regarding kiddie
porn, and ISPs' excuse to remove a value-added service.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9964895-38.html
Barry Margolin
bruce.s...@NOSPAMORELSEagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz (Bruce Sinclair)
wrote:
> In article <iphf5g$dl5$1...@dont-email.me>, John from Detroit
> <wa8...@arrl.invalid> wrote:
> >On 4/30/2011 12:49 PM, Ray Banana wrote:
> >> Thus spake RayBanana:
> >>
> >>> Reply-To: eternal-sept...@googlegroups.com
> >>
> >> This is not correct. They are hijacking mail replies and redirect them
> >> to their own groups.
> >I suspect that is true,, One of the major problems with Usenet is
> >criminal hackers have forced ISP after ISP to limit or restrict their
> >Usenet servers..
>
> Really ? I thought that ISPs limited their news group coverage because 1)
> people don't ask for it like they used to; 2) you need a dedicated server
> and feed; 3) they are too ignorant to get it right (ie know nothing hell
> desks and managers. :)
Some of them (e.g. Comcast) were already out-sourcing it to companies
like Giganews. That addresses #2, and part of #3. But they dropped it
anyway.
Gene Wirchenko
bruce.s...@NOSPAMORELSEagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz (Bruce Sinclair)
wrote:
>In article <iphf5g$dl5$1...@dont-email.me>, John from Detroit <wa8...@arrl.invalid> wrote:
>>On 4/30/2011 12:49 PM, Ray Banana wrote:
>>> Thus spake RayBanana:
>>>
>>>> Reply-To: eternal-sept...@googlegroups.com
>>>
>>> This is not correct. They are hijacking mail replies and redirect them
>>> to their own groups.
>>I suspect that is true,, One of the major problems with Usenet is
>>criminal hackers have forced ISP after ISP to limit or restrict their
>>Usenet servers..
>
>Really ? I thought that ISPs limited their news group coverage because 1)
>people don't ask for it like they used to; 2) you need a dedicated server
True. At one ISP (just over ten years ago), I was told that there
were only two of us who used it.
>and feed; 3) they are too ignorant to get it right (ie know nothing hell
You do not. My ISP used to offer USENET. They got it from (I
think) SuperNews.
>desks and managers. :)
Maybe. Some people have never heard of USENET. It certainly
does not get promoted.
>> Thus only a few places, Like eternal-September, remain
>>open to those of us who wish to read/post legitimate usenet messages.
There is a saying about how ALGOL was a great improvement over
many of its successors. The same might be said about USENET and
forums.
>>(Yes, this is a THANK YOU note)
>
>Seconded. Thanks Ray. :)
Ray, your work is much appreciated.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
Gene Wirchenko
bruce.s...@NOSPAMORELSEagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz (Bruce Sinclair)
wrote:
>In article <fc907cab-0690-4966...@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com>, eternal-sept...@googlegroups.com wrote:
For those who do not, they might never know any different.
"Successor to what?" would be their question if they ever thought it.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
Bruce Sinclair
Agereed. But they are the ones putting up with a bad thing thinking it's the
only thing. Hmmm ... sounds familiar in the context of OSs. :)
Bruce Sinclair
Some ISPs bowed to pressure and killed the whole service rather than simply
not carrying the groups concerned ? Sounds like an excuse to kill off NNTP
rather than a reason to me. Mileages may vary - or you may be more trusting
of stated reasons ? :)
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
> "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" wrote:
>> Bruce Sinclair wrote:
>> While those facts are true (but not relevant to the topic), see:
>>
>> 0) See previous posts about government intervention regarding kiddie
>> porn, and ISPs' excuse to remove a value-added service.
>> http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9964895-38.html
>
> Some ISPs bowed to pressure and killed the whole service rather than
> simply not carrying the groups concerned ? Sounds like an excuse to
> kill off NNTP rather than a reason to me. Mileages may vary - or you
> may be more trusting of stated reasons ? :)
Well, seeing as how I was a customer of two of the ISPs [1] that
completely killed NNTP within a couple of months of Mr Cuomo announcing
his plans to sue them .. I'd say my reasoning is correct. They bowed to
pressure; it was an excuse. They could have complied by just removing
the 88 identified binary groups. No, it was "easier" to just kill the
feed (and save money).
[1. AT&T Worldnet and Time Warner Roadrunner]
tlvp
> JDG43 wrote:
>
>> - Microsoft doesn't any more deliver a News client under Windows 7
>
> Microsoft doesn't any more deliver an Email client under Windows 7
> either.
>
> Does this mean that Email is dead? <shudder>
Nope, Beau -- means M$ wants to wean you away from your own machine's storage
and get you first accustomed to and then hooked on paying M$ for storage in
their own storage servers. Not one-time sales, but continual income :-) .
[And not *you*, of course, in particular, but all of us in general.]
Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
Bruce Sinclair
Thanks ... that's pretty much as I expected, but nice to have my cynicism
(or realistic view perhaps ? :) ) confirmed. :)
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>> JDG43 wrote:
>>> - Microsoft doesn't any more deliver a News client under Windows 7
>>
>> Microsoft doesn't any more deliver an Email client under Windows 7
>> either.
>>
>> Does this mean that Email is dead? <shudder>
>
> Nope, Beau -- means M$ wants to wean you away from your own machine's
> storage and get you first accustomed to and then hooked on paying M$
> for storage in their own storage servers. Not one-time sales, but
> continual income :-) .
Heh, you missed the <humour> tags... :-)
--
-bts
-Email in the cloud: share it all with friendly hackers worldwide
Golden California Girls
A little truth here, while they could have just killed the 88, that
wouldn't have stopped the CP. As soon as the 89 group was used they would
have been in violation of a court order to stop CP. Only thing they could
do was kill them all which is what Cuomo wanted.
tlvp
> tlvp wrote:
>
>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>>> JDG43 wrote:
>>>> - Microsoft doesn't any more deliver a News client under Windows 7
>>>
>>> Microsoft doesn't any more deliver an Email client under Windows 7
>>> either.
>>>
>>> Does this mean that Email is dead? <shudder>
>>
>> Nope, Beau -- means M$ wants to wean you away from your own machine's
>> storage and get you first accustomed to and then hooked on paying M$
>> for storage in their own storage servers. Not one-time sales, but
>> continual income :-) .
>
> Heh, you missed the <humour> tags... :-)
Yup -- if "<shudder>" was <humour>, I missed it :-) , sorry. No harm, though. Cheers, -- tlvp
Mike Yetto
I think the humo(u)r tag was "-bts".
Mike "the u is optional" Yetto
Mike Yetto
>A little truth here, while they could have just killed the 88, that
>wouldn't have stopped the CP. As soon as the 89 group was used they would
>have been in violation of a court order to stop CP. Only thing they could
>do was kill them all which is what Cuomo wanted.
A little more truth. The ISPs were not supplying the porn and
under the DMCA safe harbour provisions only had to block the
groups (or perhaps only the particular data) that was discovered
to be illegal. The voluntary shutdown was mostly due to the
excuse handed to them. Cuomo could have forced no more than the
blocking of specifically named newsgroups in New York.
Mike "at the most" Yetto
Bruce Sinclair
Their stated business plan (a few years ago now, but I've not heard an
update :) ) was that you should rent s/w every time you use it, downloading
it to your machine from the net each and every time. Again, pay per play,
but largely about control I reckon. Great for them ... few to no good points
for consumers.
No surprises here. :)
Bruce Sinclair
>On 5/2/11 9:15 PM, Bruce Sinclair wrote:
>>> Well, seeing as how I was a customer of two of the ISPs [1] that
>>> completely killed NNTP within a couple of months of Mr Cuomo announcing
>>> his plans to sue them .. I'd say my reasoning is correct. They bowed to
>>> pressure; it was an excuse. They could have complied by just removing
>>> the 88 identified binary groups. No, it was "easier" to just kill the
>>> feed (and save money).
>>>
>>> [1. AT&T Worldnet and Time Warner Roadrunner]
>>
>> Thanks ... that's pretty much as I expected, but nice to have my cynicism
>> (or realistic view perhaps ? :) ) confirmed. :)
>
>A little truth here, while they could have just killed the 88, that
>wouldn't have stopped the CP. As soon as the 89 group was used they would
>have been in violation of a court order to stop CP. Only thing they could
>do was kill them all which is what Cuomo wanted.
I disagree. They always had a choice. They chose to fold pathetically to
unreasonable pressure. Self serving cowards I call that. :)
Golden California Girls
> Golden California Girls <gldnc...@aol.com.mil> writes and having writ moves on.
>> A little truth here, while they could have just killed the 88, that
>> wouldn't have stopped the CP. As soon as the 89 group was used they would
>> have been in violation of a court order to stop CP. Only thing they could
>> do was kill them all which is what Cuomo wanted.
>
> A little more truth. The ISPs were not supplying the porn and
> under the DMCA safe harbour provisions only had to block the
> groups (or perhaps only the particular data) that was discovered
> to be illegal. The voluntary shutdown was mostly due to the
> excuse handed to them. Cuomo could have forced no more than the
> blocking of specifically named newsgroups in New York.
DMCA?! Are you daft?! There is nothing about copyrights involved in CP.
Perhaps you are thinking of some other older law, which did not apply
either as after Cuomo notified them of specific images -- not just groups
-- they continued to distribute them. His notification of specific images
removed the defense they didn't know what was being sent.
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
> Mike Yetto wrote:
>> Golden California Girls writes:
>>> A little truth here, while they could have just killed the 88, that
>>> wouldn't have stopped the CP. As soon as the 89 group was used
>>> they would have been in violation of a court order to stop CP.
>>> Only thing they could do was kill them all which is what Cuomo
>>> wanted.
>>
>> A little more truth. The ISPs were not supplying the porn and under
>> the DMCA safe harbour provisions only had to block the groups (or
>> perhaps only the particular data) that was discovered to be illegal.
>> The voluntary shutdown was mostly due to the excuse handed to them.
>> Cuomo could have forced no more than the blocking of specifically
>> named newsgroups in New York.
>
> DMCA?! Are you daft?! There is nothing about copyrights involved in
> CP.
>
> Perhaps you are thinking of some other older law, which did not apply
> either as after Cuomo notified them of specific images -- not just
> groups -- they continued to distribute them. His notification of
> specific images removed the defense they didn't know what was being
> sent.
Cuomo did not notify the ISPs of specific images; he identified 88
specific newsgroups that he wanted removed from the feed. Copyright was
not the issue. But as has been stated, the ISPs simply capitulated and
shut down their entire feeds/servers rather than remove the 88 groups.
And it was the excuse they were looking for to remove a value-added
service to their customers.
Mike Yetto
>On 5/3/11 9:36 AM, Mike Yetto wrote:
>> Golden California Girls <gldnc...@aol.com.mil> writes and having writ moves on.
>>> A little truth here, while they could have just killed the 88, that
>>> wouldn't have stopped the CP. As soon as the 89 group was used they would
>>> have been in violation of a court order to stop CP. Only thing they could
>>> do was kill them all which is what Cuomo wanted.
>>
>> A little more truth. The ISPs were not supplying the porn and
>> under the DMCA safe harbour provisions only had to block the
>> groups (or perhaps only the particular data) that was discovered
>> to be illegal. The voluntary shutdown was mostly due to the
>> excuse handed to them. Cuomo could have forced no more than the
>> blocking of specifically named newsgroups in New York.
>DMCA?! Are you daft?! There is nothing about copyrights involved in CP.
I referred to the safe harbour provisions of the DMCA which
indemnifies anyone who carries but does not create illegal
content. Each single instance of illegal content or copyright
violation must be taken down in a timely manner after it has been
identified. They could have kept the groups and dropped the
specific images each time they were reposted and someone identified
them.
>Perhaps you are thinking of some other older law, which did not apply
>either as after Cuomo notified them of specific images -- not just groups
>-- they continued to distribute them. His notification of specific images
>removed the defense they didn't know what was being sent.
And removing the specific images was all that was legally
required.
Mike "but the excuse was welcomed" Yetto
Golden California Girls
> Golden California Girls <gldnc...@aol.com.mil> writes and having writ moves on.
>> On 5/3/11 9:36 AM, Mike Yetto wrote:
>>> Golden California Girls <gldnc...@aol.com.mil> writes and having writ moves on.
>>>> A little truth here, while they could have just killed the 88, that
>>>> wouldn't have stopped the CP. As soon as the 89 group was used they would
>>>> have been in violation of a court order to stop CP. Only thing they could
>>>> do was kill them all which is what Cuomo wanted.
>>>
>>> A little more truth. The ISPs were not supplying the porn and
>>> under the DMCA safe harbour provisions only had to block the
>>> groups (or perhaps only the particular data) that was discovered
>>> to be illegal. The voluntary shutdown was mostly due to the
>>> excuse handed to them. Cuomo could have forced no more than the
>>> blocking of specifically named newsgroups in New York.
>
>> DMCA?! Are you daft?! There is nothing about copyrights involved in CP.
>
> I referred to the safe harbour provisions of the DMCA which
> indemnifies anyone who carries but does not create illegal
> content. Each single instance of illegal content or copyright
> violation must be taken down in a timely manner after it has been
> identified. They could have kept the groups and dropped the
> specific images each time they were reposted and someone identified
> them.
The DMCA only provides protection for civil suit for copyright, not
criminal prosecution for CP. What doe the C stand for in DMCA?
As to the removal, after Cuomo notified them of specific images they did
nothing.
Golden California Girls
> Golden California Girls wrote:
>
>> Mike Yetto wrote:
>>> Golden California Girls writes:
>>>> A little truth here, while they could have just killed the 88, that
>>>> wouldn't have stopped the CP. As soon as the 89 group was used
>>>> they would have been in violation of a court order to stop CP.
>>>> Only thing they could do was kill them all which is what Cuomo
>>>> wanted.
>>>
>>> A little more truth. The ISPs were not supplying the porn and under
>>> the DMCA safe harbour provisions only had to block the groups (or
>>> perhaps only the particular data) that was discovered to be illegal.
>>> The voluntary shutdown was mostly due to the excuse handed to them.
>>> Cuomo could have forced no more than the blocking of specifically
>>> named newsgroups in New York.
>>
>> DMCA?! Are you daft?! There is nothing about copyrights involved in
>> CP.
>>
>> Perhaps you are thinking of some other older law, which did not apply
>> either as after Cuomo notified them of specific images -- not just
>> groups -- they continued to distribute them. His notification of
>> specific images removed the defense they didn't know what was being
>> sent.
>
> Cuomo did not notify the ISPs of specific images; he identified 88
> specific newsgroups that he wanted removed from the feed.
You are misinformed. He, his agents, found CP and notified the ISP's to
remove image xyz, via regular customer service channels, the ISP did
nothing. After they continued to do that for a while that established a
pattern of knowingly distributing CP. Those images they found were in the
88 groups.
> Copyright was
> not the issue. But as has been stated, the ISPs simply capitulated and
> shut down their entire feeds/servers rather than remove the 88 groups.
> And it was the excuse they were looking for to remove a value-added
> service to their customers.
No. It meant they would have had to hire customer service agents to
actually lift a finger when they got complaints. It meant these customer
service agents would have had to be trained to identify CP so it could be
removed. That's megabucks.
Mike Yetto
>criminal prosecution for CP. What doe the C stand for in DMCA?
And we all know that each Law only has one clause and pertains to
only one thing. With the simple language used this makes the Law
so easy to interpret that lawyers and judges are only kept
around for sentimental reasons.
Mike "most of COPA was deemed unconstitutional, so what" Yetto
JDG43
<barmar-CAE977....@62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi>,
Barry Margolin <bar...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> In article
> <jdg43.filtre.anti.pollut...@62-183-169-81.bb.dnai
> nternet.fi>,
> JDG43 <jdg43.filtre....@tvtmail.ch.invalid> wrote:
>
> > - Microsoft doesn't any more deliver a News client under Windows 7
> > - Neither does Apple (since several years) under MacOS.
>
> Did Apple EVER provide a news client? I don't think so.
They did. Back in the oh-so-remote 1980s-90s. I used it but can't
remember its name.
Apple was squeezed out of News clients by... Microsoft (around 2000),
when Microsoft attempted to kill Apple altogether by issuing sabotaged
Mac versions of Office (Word 6 and Excel 5). But in the last minute
Microsoft recoiled from it, fearing trouble with the anti-trust laws.
Thus, after bringing Apple to the verge of bankruptcy, Microsoft "saved"
it by "giving" it 200 mio $... on the condition that Apple drop any
development of Internet apps (all of them far superior in quality to the
Microsoft ones). Thus Apple had to drop, among other apps, any News
client (a pity, since it was about to release an excellent one:
Cyberdog).
Since then Apple has recovered, thus becoming able to free itself from
the Microsoft "vassalage". They issued new Internet apps (among others
new mail and web clients), but no new News clients. Too little money
returns to expect from them? Or availability of very good third party
clients for MacOs (like my current one)?
Barry Margolin
<jdg43.filtre.anti.pollut...@62-183-169-81.bb.dnai
nternet.fi>,
JDG43 <jdg43.filtre....@tvtmail.ch.invalid> wrote:
> In article
> <barmar-CAE977....@62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi>,
> Barry Margolin <bar...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>
> > In article
> > <jdg43.filtre.anti.pollut...@62-183-169-81.bb.dnai
> > nternet.fi>,
> > JDG43 <jdg43.filtre....@tvtmail.ch.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > > - Microsoft doesn't any more deliver a News client under Windows 7
> > > - Neither does Apple (since several years) under MacOS.
> >
> > Did Apple EVER provide a news client? I don't think so.
>
> They did. Back in the oh-so-remote 1980s-90s. I used it but can't
> remember its name.
Was it part of that CyberDog suite that they tried for a while?
JDG43
<barmar-E51D1D....@62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi>,
Barry Margolin <bar...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> In article
> <jdg43.filtre.anti.pollut...@62-183-169-81.bb.dnai
> nternet.fi>,
> JDG43 <jdg43.filtre....@tvtmail.ch.invalid> wrote:
>
> > In article
> > <barmar-CAE977....@62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi>,
> > Barry Margolin <bar...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> > >
> > > Did Apple EVER provide a news client? I don't think so.
> >
> > They did. Back in the oh-so-remote 1980s-90s. I used it but can't
> > remember its name.
>
> Was it part of that CyberDog suite that they tried for a while?
No.
suzeeq
> They did. Back in the oh-so-remote 1980s-90s. I used it but can't
> remember its name.
>
> Apple was squeezed out of News clients by... Microsoft (around 2000),
> when Microsoft attempted to kill Apple altogether by issuing sabotaged
> Mac versions of Office (Word 6 and Excel 5). But in the last minute
> Microsoft recoiled from it, fearing trouble with the anti-trust laws.
> Thus, after bringing Apple to the verge of bankruptcy, Microsoft "saved"
> it by "giving" it 200 mio $... on the condition that Apple drop any
> development of Internet apps (all of them far superior in quality to the
> Microsoft ones). Thus Apple had to drop, among other apps, any News
> client (a pity, since it was about to release an excellent one:
> Cyberdog).
> Since then Apple has recovered, thus becoming able to free itself from
> the Microsoft "vassalage". They issued new Internet apps (among others
> new mail and web clients), but no new News clients. Too little money
> returns to expect from them? Or availability of very good third party
> clients for MacOs (like my current one)?
Couldn't you use a mail clent for news though? Others can do both.
JDG43
wrote:
> Couldn't you use a mail clent for news though? Others can do both.
Actually, *ALL* News clients embody a mail client, because they allow
you to reply by mail to any post!
About combined mail+news clients, my experience has taught me to dislike
them. 2 separate clients work better and are each user-friendlier than
a single "gasworks" client attempting to do everything (remember Outlook
and Netscape?).
suzeeq
I kind of like Netscape, at least the early versions of it. I use Tbird
and am happy with it.
John from Detroit
I used a combined clinent for years (NET Tamer) and it worked great, in
fact it was greater than great because as a DOS app, when some idiot
either sent me an infected E-mail or posted an infected USENET file..
the program displyed the infeciton in MIME code UU-8?) instead of
translating it into executable code and infecting my computer (Very evil
grin) making the old Mark-1 Eyeball a very effective anti-virus filter.
I can't tell you how many hit the bit bucket thanks to that program...
Alas, newer clients rely on my anti-malware software to do that.. Not
nearly as good as the eyeball.
Of course it was a DOS program, and it did use a DIAL UP modem. (Was
never set up for direct connect) but hey.. I liked it.
Today I use two different clients,, The one I use here is able to do
E-mail but I have disabled that.. The E-mail "client" runs remotely,
(Web mail) so again, I still don't get infected.. Not only does an
infection have to get past my on-board anti-mal-ware, it has to pass the
hosts (Different software) and often as not my paranoia as well. (I tend
not to open or even download, attachments less it's a very trusted
source of a document I'm expecting)
So far I've had no major infections, A few suspect files which were
tossed.. Only one real "Bite" and that came in via other means (infected
floppy disc) not via the net... I even know where it came from.
Theodore Heise
John from Detroit <wa8...@arrl.invalid> wrote:
> On 5/10/2011 4:18 AM, JDG43 wrote:
>> About combined mail+news clients, my experience has taught me
>> to dislike them. 2 separate clients work better and are each
>> user-friendlier than a single "gasworks" client attempting to
>> do everything (remember Outlook and Netscape?).
Separate clients is consistent with the general Unix/Linux
philosophy to have tools optimized for specific individual uses,
and combine them as needed. I've done this for over 15 years,
using slrn for news and Pine for mail--combining them by saving
posts I wish to keep directly into Pine's mail folders. That way,
I have all my records in one place--for ease of access.
> I used a combined clinent for years (NET Tamer) and it worked
> great, in fact it was greater than great because as a DOS app...
That rings a bell, I think it was considered one option for the
HP200LX.
--
Theodore (Ted) Heise <th...@heise.nu> Bloomington, IN, USA
Bill Davidsen
> JDG43<jdg43.filtre....@tvtmail.ch.invalid> proclaims:
>
>> [...]
>> Under such circumstances, does Usenet still have a future?
>> With the main OSs now "News-client-less" (with the sole exception of
>> good brave Linux, but it's in the minority), there remain only, as News
>> clients available, maintained and upgraded, those from "third party"
>> suppliers (e.g. Mozilla Thunderbird and Opera (both multi-OS),
>> NewsWatcher (under MacOS), etc.). Do these laudable "third parties"
>> believe in the future of Usenet, or are they just fighting a rear-guard
>> action doomed to a final defeat?
>
> Google Groups has announced a new interface:
> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!overview>
>
> I've not investigated the UI so far, but at least Google didn't forget
> about Usenet, which is a surprise to me.
Let me belatedly remind people, the NNTP protocol is more than USNET
(and vice-versa). News readers are often better suited to threaded
conversations, and the limitation to text only is based on the server
choices, there are a number of servers which carry private groups which
allow HTML and use it primarily.
I personally use Seamonkey for everything, since the mail/news/rss
reader handles the things I want to do.
--
Bill Davidsen <davi...@tmr.com>
CTO TMR Associates Inc
"Depressions can be seen as malthusian cures for economic fevers
brought on by increasing separation between reality and beliefs among
economic decision makers" -Paul Murphy
Bill Davidsen
I started using Seamonkey while I was project leader for USENET at
Prodigy (later SBC, later AT&T, etc). Having all my reading in one place
under one UI eliminated the "what window am I in" thing. Fortunately
it's a personal choice, there are both.
I use pan for binary groups, although I can't find a server which
carries just the low volume non-porn groups and charges accordingly. I
want my alt.binaries.pictures.gardens ;-)
I know that's carried here, but with a size limit too small to do
anything but text.
Bert Hyman
news:jdg43.filtre.anti.pollut...@62-183-169-81.bb.d
nainternet.fi JDG43 <jdg43.filtre....@tvtmail.ch.invalid>
wrote:
> In article <iq671v$bnf$1...@speranza.aioe.org>, suzeeq
> <suz...@imbris.com> wrote:
>
>> Couldn't you use a mail clent for news though? Others can do both.
>
> Actually, *ALL* News clients embody a mail client, because they allow
> you to reply by mail to any post!
That's just half of a mail client.
--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN be...@iphouse.com
John from Detroit
> JDG43 wrote:
>> In article<iq671v$bnf$1...@speranza.aioe.org>, suzeeq<suz...@imbris.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Couldn't you use a mail clent for news though? Others can do both.
>>
>> Actually, *ALL* News clients embody a mail client, because they allow
>> you to reply by mail to any post!
>>
>> About combined mail+news clients, my experience has taught me to dislike
>> them. 2 separate clients work better and are each user-friendlier than
>> a single "gasworks" client attempting to do everything (remember Outlook
>> and Netscape?).
>
> I started using Seamonkey while I was project leader for USENET at
> Prodigy (later SBC, later AT&T, etc). Having all my reading in one place
> under one UI eliminated the "what window am I in" thing. Fortunately
> it's a personal choice, there are both.
>
> I use pan for binary groups, although I can't find a server which
> carries just the low volume non-porn groups and charges accordingly. I
> want my alt.binaries.pictures.gardens ;-)
>
> I know that's carried here, but with a size limit too small to do
> anything but text.
>
Considering the line "I can't find .... Porn..."
The "But with a size limit" is, in my not very humble opinion, A VERY
GOOD THING...
But then I'm 100% text, you upload a binary to a NG I visit you are in
danger of being KFed. or is the KniFed. Hey that's a good term.
Gene Wirchenko
<wa8...@arrl.invalid> wrote:
>On 5/27/2011 11:15 AM, Bill Davidsen wrote:
[snip]
>> I use pan for binary groups, although I can't find a server which
>> carries just the low volume non-porn groups and charges accordingly. I
>> want my alt.binaries.pictures.gardens ;-)
[snip]
>Considering the line "I can't find .... Porn..."
That was "non-porn".
>The "But with a size limit" is, in my not very humble opinion, A VERY
>GOOD THING...
>
>But then I'm 100% text, you upload a binary to a NG I visit you are in
>danger of being KFed. or is the KniFed. Hey that's a good term.
I suppose a KniFing need not be fatal.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
Bill Davidsen
> On 5/27/2011 11:15 AM, Bill Davidsen wrote:
>> I started using Seamonkey while I was project leader for USENET at
>> Prodigy (later SBC, later AT&T, etc). Having all my reading in one place
>> under one UI eliminated the "what window am I in" thing. Fortunately
>> it's a personal choice, there are both.
>>
>> I use pan for binary groups, although I can't find a server which
>> carries just the low volume non-porn groups and charges accordingly. I
>> want my alt.binaries.pictures.gardens ;-)
>>
>> I know that's carried here, but with a size limit too small to do
>> anything but text.
>>
>
>
> Considering the line "I can't find .... Porn..."
>
Wow! I have had people take a sentence out of a paragraph out of
context, even a few words out of a sentence, but you are the first
person so desperate to post a cutting reply that you took PART of a
hyphenated word out of context.
IMHO that is totally lame. At least you quoted the original so people
can read what I actually said and meant.
Bootstrap Bill
down, no big deal. If Google goes out of business (it could happen!), there
goes your Google Groups. Their archive will probably cease to exist.
We need a modern replacement for Usenet. One that doesn't depend on the
existence of a single company. One that can't be shut down by state
governments because they might be used by sickos.
Can organizations like Eternal-September replace Usenet? If Ray Banana could
get other people with the resources to work with him, perhaps he could
create his own network of news servers that could survive the death of
Usenet.
Tony Toews
<mousep...@NO-SPAMgmail.coma> wrote:
>We need a modern replacement for Usenet.
Why?
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Tony's Main MS Access pages - http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/
For a convenient utility to keep your users FEs and other files
updated see http://www.autofeupdater.com/
Bootstrap Bill
"Tony Toews" wrote in message
news:e3ie27hdpv4hctfi2...@4ax.com...
Bruce Sinclair
>On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 13:50:57 -0700, "Bootstrap Bill"
><mousep...@NO-SPAMgmail.coma> wrote:
>
>>We need a modern replacement for Usenet.
>
>Why?
In a word ? ... security. That was the original point of the interweb
thingy after all. :)
Barry Margolin
"Bootstrap Bill" <mousep...@NO-SPAMgmail.coma> wrote:
> The best part about Usenet is that it is distributed. If one server goes
> down, no big deal. If Google goes out of business (it could happen!), there
> goes your Google Groups. Their archive will probably cease to exist.
When DejaNews went out of business, the archive was acquired by Google
and turned into Google Groups. If Google goes out of business, probably
someone will come along and acquire their assets.
>
> We need a modern replacement for Usenet. One that doesn't depend on the
> existence of a single company. One that can't be shut down by state
> governments because they might be used by sickos.
What single company is Usenet currently dependent on?
>
> Can organizations like Eternal-September replace Usenet? If Ray Banana could
> get other people with the resources to work with him, perhaps he could
> create his own network of news servers that could survive the death of
> Usenet.
What's wrong with the existing Usenet network? As you said above, the
best part is that it's distributed.
Bootstrap Bill
access. The NY attorney general is the one to blame here. Either fix Usenet
(probably can't happen), or replace it with something better.
"Barry Margolin" wrote in message
news:barmar-347556....@news.eternal-september.org...
Barry Margolin
"Bootstrap Bill" <mousep...@NO-SPAMgmail.coma> wrote:
> It's slowly disappearing. Most of the major ISP's stopped providing Usenet
So? As long as there are services like E-S, AIOE, Individual.net,
Giganews, etc. there will still be Usenet.
> access. The NY attorney general is the one to blame here. Either fix Usenet
> (probably can't happen), or replace it with something better.
He's now the NY Governer, isn't he?
NotMe
"Bootstrap Bill" <mousep...@NO-SPAMgmail.coma> wrote in message
news:j082o6$ies$1...@dont-email.me...
> It's slowly disappearing. Most of the major ISP's stopped providing Usenet
> access. The NY attorney general is the one to blame here. Either fix
> Usenet (probably can't happen), or replace it with something better.
>
>
Yo$$1960
> access. The NY attorney general is the one to blame here. Either fix
As NotMe points out, he's the excuse, not the reason. The reason is money.
> Usenet (probably can't happen), or replace it with something better.
Usenet isn't broken; I get news daily without problem. How then, do you
"fix" it?
--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)rad never immediately apparent"
Is she really going out with him?
New Rose - The Damned
Yo$$1960
> When DejaNews went out of business, the archive was acquired by Google and
> turned into Google Groups. If Google goes out of business, probably
They've tried to bend usenet to their will. As ever, they've got it
wrong. Very wrong. In the same way that gmail!=email,
googlegroups!=usenet.
> someone will come along and acquire their assets.
No doubt, but will they do it any better than google? I doubt it very
much.
--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)rad never immediately apparent"
I'm spending all my money and it's going up my nose
Teenage Depression - Eddie & The Hot Rods
Bootstrap Bill
there won't be any new users to take their place. Most people today are into
Facebook and other social websites.
It's true, you do get it daily, but have you seen the traffic? Hardly anyone
posts anymore. Some of the newsgroups I participated in ten years ago had
more than a hundred posts a day. Now they may only get a few in a single
month, if that at all.
So what's the solution? Let it continue to bleed until there is nothing
left?
"Yo$$1960" wrote in message
news:pan.2011.07.21....@yoss1960.eternal-september.org...
Nick Spalding
on Thu, 21 Jul 2011 00:42:35 -0700:
> Usenet is dying. ISP's no longer support it. When the few old timers go on
> there won't be any new users to take their place. Most people today are into
> Facebook and other social websites.
>
> It's true, you do get it daily, but have you seen the traffic? Hardly anyone
> posts anymore. Some of the newsgroups I participated in ten years ago had
> more than a hundred posts a day. Now they may only get a few in a single
> month, if that at all.
>
> So what's the solution? Let it continue to bleed until there is nothing
> left?
Of the four non-technical groups I have been a regular on for nearly
sixteen years only a.f.u has had a serious drop off, it used to be up in
the 100-200 range. a.f.c is a bit down but the other two are thriving.
<fixed pitch>
Per day for the last 28 days: Avg Min Max
alt.fan.cecil-adams 303 181 436
alt.folklore.computers 50 16 98
alt.folklore.urban 21 1 51
alt.usage.english 205 120 314
--
Nick Spalding
Nick Spalding
<pan.2011.07.21....@yoss1960.eternal-september.org>
on Thu, 21 Jul 2011 08:06:07 +0100:
> On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 21:34:11 -0400, Barry Margolin wrote:
>
> > When DejaNews went out of business, the archive was acquired by Google and
> > turned into Google Groups. If Google goes out of business, probably
>
> They've tried to bend usenet to their will. As ever, they've got it
> wrong. Very wrong. In the same way that gmail!=email,
> googlegroups!=usenet.
>
> > someone will come along and acquire their assets.
>
> No doubt, but will they do it any better than google? I doubt it very
> much.
For any sensible user all that is required is to scale it back to what
DejaNews did and get it right. Forget pretending to be a newsreader.
--
Nick Spalding
Stephen Wolstenholme
wrote:
It is good to see some statistics that show Usenet is far from fading
away. I was gathering my own group statistic but decided that the
total was the only useful figure. This morning I had 929 messages.
That's above average. Since my last directory update a few weeks ago
there are 46 new newsgroups.
Steve
--
Neural network software applications, help and support.
Neural Planner Software www.NPSL1.com
Yo$$1960
> For any sensible user all that is required is to scale it back to what
> DejaNews did and get it right. Forget pretending to be a newsreader.
Indeed. Not everything is, or should be, accessible from a web browser.
--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)rad never immediately apparent"
There's no point in asking you'll get no reply
Pretty Vacant - Sex Pistols
Yo$$1960
> Usenet is dying. ISP's no longer support it. When the few old timers go on
Everything dies. It's just the rate of decline and whether there's a
better alternative. So far, I see no alternative. Certainly not a better
one. If something better comes along...
I'm happy with usenet. I'd be happier, admittedly, if there were more
people using usenet. OTOH, I like being considered "niche" by my friends. :-)
> there won't be any new users to take their place. Most people today are
> into Facebook and other social websites.
They don't serve the same purpose. Making that an unfair comparison.
> It's true, you do get it daily, but have you seen the traffic? Hardly
Yes, there's been a decline in traffic in many groups, I agree. Of
course, there has in the past, been multiple groups serving the same
demographic. Obviously, many of those groups now lie dormant.
> So what's the solution? Let it continue to bleed until there is nothing
> left?
If it goes the way of the Dodo, so be it. I'll mourn the loss. But, I
don't see it happening for a fair few years yet.
--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)rad never immediately apparent"
Why do they try to hide our past pulling down houses and build car parks
Bricks & Mortar - The Jam
Tony Toews
bruce.s...@NOSPAMORELSEagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz (Bruce Sinclair)
wrote:
>>>We need a modern replacement for Usenet.
>>
>>Why?
>
>In a word ? ... security. That was the original point of the interweb
>thingy after all. :)
My newsreader is set to only show the last 7 days of activity.
Tony
Phillip Jones
> Usenet is dying. ISP's no longer support it. When the few old timers go
> on there won't be any new users to take their place. Most people today
> are into Facebook and other social websites.
>
> It's true, you do get it daily, but have you seen the traffic? Hardly
> anyone posts anymore. Some of the newsgroups I participated in ten years
> ago had more than a hundred posts a day. Now they may only get a few in
> a single month, if that at all.
>
> So what's the solution? Let it continue to bleed until there is nothing
> left?
>
>
>
>
>
> "Yo$$1960" wrote in message
> news:pan.2011.07.21....@yoss1960.eternal-september.org...
>
> On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 19:25:55 -0700, Bootstrap Bill wrote:
>
>> access. The NY attorney general is the one to blame here. Either fix
>
> As NotMe points out, he's the excuse, not the reason. The reason is money.
>
>> Usenet (probably can't happen), or replace it with something better.
>
> Usenet isn't broken; I get news daily without problem. How then, do you
> "fix" it?
>
My ISP hasn't had a dedicated news server supplying them in years. But
the have new capability.
So I get Eternal-September and also albasani.net and Annexcafe just fine.
--
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. "If it's Fixed, Don't Break it"
http://www.phillipmjones.net/ mailto:pjo...@kimbanet.com
vg4cysss7001
<mousep...@NO-SPAMgmail.coma> writes
>Because Usenet is dying.
I have a different POV. Of course we mourn the literal deaths of
various posters in our subscribed groups, except those who top-post :-)
Perhaps you mean that Usenet has a smaller audience than at its peak?
Perhaps that is no bad thing for those who remain?
Preferring web fora, with all their inherent disadvantages, says
a lot about those who choose that path.
I never did much more than only experiment with binary Usenet.
Perhaps throttling and capping by ISPs has had some effect on the
popularity of that, together with the coming of BitTorrenting.
>
>"Tony Toews" wrote in message news:e3ie27hdpv4hctfi2gr67fbsfh2mkqg2ra@
>4ax.com...
>
>On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 13:50:57 -0700, "Bootstrap Bill"
><mousep...@NO-SPAMgmail.coma> wrote:
>
>>We need a modern replacement for Usenet.
>
>Why?
--
Misha
Free on-line, off-site backups?
<https://mozy.com/?ref=UK45Y5>
vg4cysss7001
<mousep...@NO-SPAMgmail.coma> writes
>Usenet is dying. ISP's no longer support it. When the few old timers go
>on there won't be any new users to take their place. Most people today
>are into Facebook and other social websites.
Right, the kind of people who have hundreds of virtual
'friends', rather than a number of real ones?
>
>It's true, you do get it daily, but have you seen the traffic? Hardly
>anyone posts anymore. Some of the newsgroups I participated in ten
>years ago had more than a hundred posts a day. Now they may only get a
>few in a single month, if that at all.
I have 8,477 unread messages in uk.rec.sheds. Not enough hours
in the day :-(
>
>So what's the solution? Let it continue to bleed until there is nothing
>left?
>
Your X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3508.1109
does not seem to have quoted the following (left unsnipped for
illustration) correctly, or you have deliberately set it not to.
Are you a troll?
>
>
>
>
>"Yo$$1960" wrote in message news:pan.2011.07.21.07.03.40.886155@yoss19
>60.eternal-september.org...
>
>On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 19:25:55 -0700, Bootstrap Bill wrote:
>
>> access. The NY attorney general is the one to blame here. Either fix
>
>As NotMe points out, he's the excuse, not the reason. The reason is money.
>
>> Usenet (probably can't happen), or replace it with something better.
>
>Usenet isn't broken; I get news daily without problem. How then, do you
>"fix" it?
>
--
vg4cysss7001
NOSPAMORELSEagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz> writes
Text-only Usenet is surely more secure than something web-based?
Sunny Bard
> Of course we mourn the literal deaths of
> various posters in our subscribed groups, except those who top-post :-)
Hi Misha, long time no post! pop into the outbuilding and say hello ...
Stephen Wolstenholme
wrote:
>In article <j07sgf$6fj$9...@dont-email.me>, Bruce Sinclair <bruce.sinclair@
>NOSPAMORELSEagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz> writes
>>In article <e3ie27hdpv4hctfi2...@4ax.com>, Tony Toews
>><tto...@telusplanet.net> wrote:
>>>On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 13:50:57 -0700, "Bootstrap Bill"
>>><mousep...@NO-SPAMgmail.coma> wrote:
>>>
>>>>We need a modern replacement for Usenet.
>>>
>>>Why?
>>
>>In a word ? ... security. That was the original point of the interweb
>>thingy after all. :)
>>
>
> Text-only Usenet is surely more secure than something web-based?
More secure and hundreds of times faster than individual forums.
Bootstrap Bill
"vg4cysss7001" wrote in message news:EICAmdEA...@spam.filter...
\ Your X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3508.1109
does not seem to have quoted the following (left unsnipped for
illustration) correctly, or you have deliberately set it not to.
Are you a troll?
So you think I'm a troll because I'm using a shitty news reader? Get a
freaking life.
Mike Yetto
> Your X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3508.1109
>does not seem to have quoted the following (left unsnipped for
>illustration) correctly, or you have deliberately set it not to.
Actually, MWLM is only playing at being a newsreader. The
behaviour you see is default and, while top-posting can be
avoided, there is no way to quote previous posts.
Microsoft gave up on Usenet, why not give up on newsreaders as
well?
Mike "why not give up on MS?" Yetto
--
In theory, theory and practice are the same.
In practice they are not.
Mike Yetto
> Are you a troll?
You are using a shitty e-mail client to post to Usenet. MWLM
doesn't meet the minimum requirements of a newsreader.
Mike "well, maybe very early alpha" Yetto
David J Taylor
news:slrn201107221220...@may.eternal-september.org...
My version of Windows Live Mail seems to be able to quote previous posts.
Cheers,
David
Sunny Bard
> My version of Windows Live Mail seems to be able to quote previous posts.
Indeed, but don't upgrade from v14 to v15 ...
Mike Yetto
>David J Taylor wrote:
>> My version of Windows Live Mail seems to be able to quote previous posts.
>Indeed, but don't upgrade from v14 to v15 ...
Ah-ha, that's how he did it. It was not "fixed" by an update.
Mike "sigh" Yetto
Mike Yetto
>My version of Windows Live Mail seems to be able to quote previous posts.
Please tell everyone how (for the sake of Usenet) and then work
on auto-trimming the sig.
Mike "and thanks in advance" Yetto
vg4cysss7001
<sunn...@txinfo.org> writes
I _am_ reading the outbuilding, but have 8,357 unread articles to catch
up with :-(
See you soon - maybe (a new visa is expected any say now).
vg4cysss7001
tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> writes
>"Mike Yetto" <mye...@nycap.invalid> wrote in message news:slrn20110722
Indeed, congratulations! :-)
Perhaps the other guy (a MVP?) does not know how to use the product
correctly? [Hint: top-posting.]
vg4cysss7001
Mike Yetto <mye...@nycap.invalid> writes
[snip]
>
>Mike "why not give up on MS?" Yetto
2 of my 3 current machines have broken Windows.
Well, I am guessing at that. They both BSOD if anything is plugged into
a USB port.
An old demo distro of Ubuntu saved the day recently when the
registry got screwed and the 3rd machine became unbootable. So, as soon
as I get some tuits, I'll revisit the land of dual-booting as a first
step to giving up on MS.
vg4cysss7001
Mike Yetto <mye...@nycap.invalid> writes
>Sunny Bard <sunn...@txinfo.org> writes and having writ moves on.
>>David J Taylor wrote:
>
>>> My version of Windows Live Mail seems to be able to quote previous posts.
>
>>Indeed, but don't upgrade from v14 to v15 ...
>
>Ah-ha, that's how he did it. It was not "fixed" by an update.
>
>Mike "sigh" Yetto
Maybe this should be in a.f.n?
I have used my "niche" newsreader, Turnpike, for more than 10 years.
For version 6 it became a Windows Explorer shell-space(?) extension.
Microsoft broke that after XP and it has difficulty running in Windows 7
32-bit and requires a VM in 64-bit :-(
Fortunately, my 20 year-old RV runs on diesel and I can still
get parts for it.
Drifty "not all change is progress and not all progress is change" Wood
:-)
vg4cysss7001
Mike Yetto <mye...@nycap.invalid> writes
>Bootstrap Bill <mousep...@NO-SPAMgmail.coma> writes and having writ
>moves on.
>
>>"vg4cysss7001" wrote in message news:EICAmdEA...@spam.filter...
>
>>\ Your X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3508.1109
>>does not seem to have quoted the following (left unsnipped for
>>illustration) correctly, or you have deliberately set it not to.
>
>> Are you a troll?
>
>
>>So you think I'm a troll because I'm using a shitty news reader? Get a
>>freaking life.
I did not see that reply, because I am a disciple of Blinky and
filter out all Gropers :-)
Thanks for quoting it :-)
>
>You are using a shitty e-mail client to post to Usenet. MWLM
>doesn't meet the minimum requirements of a newsreader.
>
>Mike "well, maybe very early alpha" Yetto
Drifty "What does it say about people who take offence at a simple
question?" Wood
Sunny Bard
> I wuz in furrin ports for a while.
Good oh!
> I _am_ reading the outbuilding, but have 8,357 unread articles to catch
> up with :-(
You might want to skip over the ones where it was speculated you might
have gorn and done something silly
> See you soon - maybe (a new visa is expected any say now).
Whenever ... glad to see you're still around anyway!
Mike Yetto
>Mike Yetto <mye...@nycap.invalid> writes
>[snip]
>>
>>Mike "why not give up on MS?" Yetto
> 2 of my 3 current machines have broken Windows.
>Well, I am guessing at that. They both BSOD if anything is plugged into
>a USB port.
> An old demo distro of Ubuntu saved the day recently when the
>registry got screwed and the 3rd machine became unbootable. So, as soon
>as I get some tuits, I'll revisit the land of dual-booting as a first
>step to giving up on MS.
If one machine is unusable, why not jump in with both feet?
Mike "just rip that band-aid off" Yetto
vg4cysss7001
<sunn...@txinfo.org> writes
>vg4cysss7001 wrote:
>
>> I wuz in furrin ports for a while.
>
>Good oh!
>
>> I _am_ reading the outbuilding, but have 8,357 unread articles to catch
>> up with :-(
>
>You might want to skip over the ones where it was speculated you might
>have gorn and done something silly
I have that to look forward to - unless they have expired
server-side. Down to 8,250 unread now, but maybe headers only.
>
>> See you soon - maybe (a new visa is expected any say now).
>
>Whenever ... glad to see you're still around anyway!
"Act in haste, regret at leisure"?
vg4cysss7001
Mike Yetto <mye...@nycap.invalid> writes
>vg4cysss7001 <127@[127.0.0.1]> writes and having writ moves on.
>>In article <slrn201107221220...@may.eternal-september.org>,
>>Mike Yetto <mye...@nycap.invalid> writes
>>[snip]
>>>
>>>Mike "why not give up on MS?" Yetto
>
>> 2 of my 3 current machines have broken Windows.
>>Well, I am guessing at that. They both BSOD if anything is plugged into
>>a USB port.
>
>> An old demo distro of Ubuntu saved the day recently when the
>>registry got screwed and the 3rd machine became unbootable. So, as soon
>>as I get some tuits, I'll revisit the land of dual-booting as a first
>>step to giving up on MS.
>
>If one machine is unusable, why not jump in with both feet?
>
>Mike "just rip that band-aid off" Yetto
I can't live without a daily 'fix' of Usenet :-(