Evening all,
"The USENET management committee has reconvened and there are green
shoots of growth in the original, pre-World Wide Web social network.
USENET, or NetNews, is a text-only social discussions forum, or rather a
set of a great many forums, called "newsgroups," carried by multiple
servers around the world. Although the original developers closed down
their instance in 2010, that was just one server out of hundreds, and
many are still running just fine. It never went away – it's still alive, you can get on it for free, and there is a choice of client apps for
most OSes to help you navigate."
Article here:
<https://www.theregister.com/2023/08/30/usenet_revival/>
Robert <monstoor@spammedia.com> wrote:
Evening all,
"The USENET management committee has reconvened and there are green
shoots of growth in the original, pre-World Wide Web social network.
The fun thing about Usenet is that it never left, and by its very
design, was/is able to stick around as long as there are folks
interested in running a server and peering to at least one other
server.
I ran one for a while. Slightly hairy/slightly above my level of
expertise,
but I enjoyed it.
Usenet rules. Noone owns it so no one can pull the kind of
shenanigans you now see on Twitter/Reddit.
Most young people will be turned off that it involves text, not
images.
Most young people will be turned off that it involves text, not
images. That's fine with me. They can gather elsewhere.
"The USENET management committee has reconvened and there are green
shoots of growth in the original, pre-World Wide Web social network.
On 8/30/23 17:47, Retrograde wrote:
Most young people will be turned off that it involves text, not
images. That's fine with me. They can gather elsewhere.
The lack of moderation is probably more of a turnoff for younger
folks. A lot of them just don't have a tolerance for spam.
That's a pretty bad take, my guy. Have you ever talked to a Gen Z
person?
Most of them I've met are fine with free speech, they just
want people held accountable for hate speech.
Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences.
Most young people will be turned off that it involves text, not
images. That's fine with me. They can gather elsewhere.
On 8/30/23 17:47, Retrograde wrote:
Most young people will be turned off that it involves text, not
images. That's fine with me. They can gather elsewhere.
The lack of moderation is probably more of a turnoff for younger folks.
A lot of them just don't have a tolerance for spam.
Am 31.08.2023 schrieb rdh <rdh@tilde.institute>:
That's a pretty bad take, my guy. Have you ever talked to a Gen Z
person?
I am 22 and I know people from school, work etc.
Most of them I've met are fine with free speech, they just
want people held accountable for hate speech.
The term "hate speech" is an elastic word. Some people think that
advocating against immigration or social welfare is already hate speech
that must be forbidden.
Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences.
That is true, but some people think that opinions they cannot accept
must be censored.
I like that this doesn't happen on Usenet.
Many posters (some of whom I have actually met in RL as a result of
usenet) have migrated to Cursed Facebook, but the change is
distressing. Far fewer discussions, just pronouncements; FB doesn't
make discussion easy.
The kids don't know what they missed.
Am 31.08.2023 um 09:35:39 Uhr schrieb The Real Bev:
On 8/31/23 7:38 AM, rdh wrote:
On 8/30/23 17:47, Retrograde wrote:
Most young people will be turned off that it involves text, not
images. That's fine with me. They can gather elsewhere.
The lack of moderation is probably more of a turnoff for younger
folks. A lot of them just don't have a tolerance for spam.
I rarely see spam;
There are groups like comp.lang.c that are currently flooded with spam.
On 8/31/23 7:38 AM, rdh wrote:
On 8/30/23 17:47, Retrograde wrote:
Most young people will be turned off that it involves text, not
images. That's fine with me. They can gather elsewhere.
The lack of moderation is probably more of a turnoff for younger
folks. A lot of them just don't have a tolerance for spam.
I rarely see spam;
the real problem is the people who seem to like
arguing with other posters about character flaws and incorrect
'facts'. I hate seeing threads where that's obviously what happened
and which are the vast majority of the day's posts.
I'm tough. I check the groups I began subscribing to back in the 90s
every day, but it's really depressing. Many posters (some of whom I
have actually met in RL as a result of usenet) have migrated to
Cursed Facebook, but the change is distressing. Far fewer
discussions, just pronouncements; FB doesn't make discussion easy.
My FB 'friends' are mostly people I "knew" from usenet and their RL
or net friends.
On 8/30/23 17:47, Retrograde wrote:
Most young people will be turned off that it involves text, not
images. That's fine with me. They can gather elsewhere.
The lack of moderation is probably more of a turnoff for younger folks.
A lot of them just don't have a tolerance for spam.
Am 31.08.2023 um 09:35:39 Uhr schrieb The Real Bev:
On 8/31/23 7:38 AM, rdh wrote:
On 8/30/23 17:47, Retrograde wrote:
Most young people will be turned off that it involves text, not
images. That's fine with me. They can gather elsewhere.
The lack of moderation is probably more of a turnoff for younger
folks. A lot of them just don't have a tolerance for spam.
I rarely see spam;
There are groups like comp.lang.c that are currently flooded with spam.
There are groups like comp.lang.c that are currently
flooded with spam.
Marco Moock:
There are groups like comp.lang.c that are currently
flooded with spam.
Yeah, sometimes I would log into Google, open a SPAM-ridden newsgroup
and report messages from vairous spammers via their interface. Never
seemed to help. Perhaps Google encourage SPAM in Usenet in order to
kill it?
If your client's killfiles work with regex ...
"Message-ID: .*googlegroups.*$"
Marco Moock:
There are groups like comp.lang.c that are currently
flooded with spam.
Yeah, sometimes I would log into Google, open a SPAM-ridden
newsgroup and report messages from vairous spammers via
their interface. Never seemed to help. Perhaps Google
encourage SPAM in Usenet in order to kill it?
<snip>
Bravo, kid! I find it terrifying that so many people are just fine with censorship as long as it makes everything 'nicer'.
It may be noted that I am in my third Nextdoor jail sentence. They're
even worse than Facebook, but since the local fishwraps (both analog and digital) are worthless it's the only practical source of actual LOCAL
news available. What's scary is that those people are NOT kids.
Hell in a handbasket.
Killfiles to the rescue! (Remember when Pan called them Bozofilters?
Loved that - so many bozos out there).
BTW: If you want a space to get out your opinions, why not try handing
out fliers on a street corner? Nobody can censor you if you're self-publishing.
Dan Purgert:
If your client's killfiles work with regex ...
"Message-ID: .*googlegroups.*$"
See also:
http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/filters_bg.html
I think I should prefer:
User-Agent: G2/.*$
Am 31.08.2023 um 22:26:55 Uhr schrieb Anton Shepelev:
Marco Moock:
There are groups like comp.lang.c that are currently
flooded with spam.
Yeah, sometimes I would log into Google, open a SPAM-ridden
newsgroup and report messages from vairous spammers via
their interface. Never seemed to help. Perhaps Google
encourage SPAM in Usenet in order to kill it?
Google does give a fuck about abuse of their services at all.
They don't care about spam via Gmail too and don't care
about abuse mail, even if ISPs send them.
Am 31.08.2023 um 09:35:39 Uhr schrieb The Real Bev:
On 8/31/23 7:38 AM, rdh wrote:
On 8/30/23 17:47, Retrograde wrote:
Most young people will be turned off that it involves text, not
images. That's fine with me. They can gather elsewhere.
The lack of moderation is probably more of a turnoff for younger
folks. A lot of them just don't have a tolerance for spam.
I rarely see spam;
There are groups like comp.lang.c that are currently flooded with spam.
the real problem is the people who seem to like
arguing with other posters about character flaws and incorrect
'facts'. I hate seeing threads where that's obviously what happened
and which are the vast majority of the day's posts.
I cannot agree at least for the technical discussion groups in Usenet,
but also on mailing list and forums.
I'm tough. I check the groups I began subscribing to back in the 90s
every day, but it's really depressing. Many posters (some of whom I
have actually met in RL as a result of usenet) have migrated to
Cursed Facebook, but the change is distressing. Far fewer
discussions, just pronouncements; FB doesn't make discussion easy.
My FB 'friends' are mostly people I "knew" from usenet and their RL
or net friends.
I don't have FB, I have canceled my WhatApp account, people have to
contact me by email.
Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> wrote:
Marco Moock:
There are groups like comp.lang.c that are currently
flooded with spam.
Yeah, sometimes I would log into Google, open a SPAM-ridden newsgroup
and report messages from vairous spammers via their interface. Never
seemed to help. Perhaps Google encourage SPAM in Usenet in order to
kill it?
Google's "report spam" interface seems to go nowhere (other than hiding
the "last X" you so marked from your view in their web interface.
But it did not seem that they went to any team that did anything with
the reports to cut off the spammers using google's interface to inject
that spam.
Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> wrote:
Am 31.08.2023 um 09:35:39 Uhr schrieb The Real Bev:
On 8/31/23 7:38 AM, rdh wrote:
On 8/30/23 17:47, Retrograde wrote:
Most young people will be turned off that it involves text, not
images. That's fine with me. They can gather elsewhere.
The lack of moderation is probably more of a turnoff for younger
folks. A lot of them just don't have a tolerance for spam.
I rarely see spam;
There are groups like comp.lang.c that are currently flooded with spam.
Also sci.crypt -- flooded with hundreds of google groups sourced spams
daily.
Although a killfile rule that kills anything posted from google groups
does clean that mess up.
On 8/31/23 11:43, The Real Bev wrote:
<snip>
Bravo, kid! I find it terrifying that so many people are just fine with >> censorship as long as it makes everything 'nicer'.
It may be noted that I am in my third Nextdoor jail sentence. They're
even worse than Facebook, but since the local fishwraps (both analog and
digital) are worthless it's the only practical source of actual LOCAL
news available. What's scary is that those people are NOT kids.
Hell in a handbasket.
I feel like you guys aren't engaging in good-faith conversation here.
There's a gulf of difference between censorship, and basic moderation to
keep the bots from spamming us with offers for pills or what-the-hell ever.
Killfiles/filters are great, but they only work after the fact.
BTW: If you want a space to get out your opinions, why not try handing
out fliers on a street corner? Nobody can censor you if you're self-publishing.
IMO Google's real motive is to kill Usenet because they can't monetise advertising on it. It has always this way ever since they set up their ersatz "Google Groups" and made a gateway into real Usenet.
Great damage was done done to Usenet resources when Google borged
DejaNews and ruined that very valuable, 99% complete, and easily
searched Usenet archive.
In my view there is not now and never has been much of value contributed
to Usenet by Google.
Great damage was done done to Usenet resources when Google borged
DejaNews and ruined that very valuable, 99% complete, and easily
searched Usenet archive.
I really had hope when google took it over that it would eventually be searchable back to Day 1. Big disappointment. I finally found my first
post in 1994, but it wasn't easy and I'm not sure I could do it again.
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
Great damage was done done to Usenet resources when Google borged
DejaNews and ruined that very valuable, 99% complete, and easily
searched Usenet archive.
I really had hope when google took it over that it would eventually be
searchable back to Day 1. Big disappointment. I finally found my first
post in 1994, but it wasn't easy and I'm not sure I could do it again.
Yes, exactly the same for me. Actually, I'm quite glad about that;
my debut posts were utterly, toe-curlingly, naïve and embarrassing.
[red face, foot shuffle]
On 8/30/23 17:47, Retrograde wrote:
Most young people will be turned off that it involves text, not
images. That's fine with me. They can gather elsewhere.
The lack of moderation is probably more of a turnoff for younger folks.
A lot of them just don't have a tolerance for spam.
rdh <rdh@tilde.institute> wrote:
On 8/30/23 17:47, Retrograde wrote:
Most young people will be turned off that it involves text, not
images. That's fine with me. They can gather elsewhere.
The lack of moderation is probably more of a turnoff for younger folks.
A lot of them just don't have a tolerance for spam.
Most spam, I say 99%, comes from gmail.com, you can kill all
posts from *.gmail.com and most spam will be gone.
I am starting to think of doing that, but there are a small
percentages of post that were informative. So for now, I
just kill emails I see had sent the spam.
I am starting to think of doing that, but there are a small
percentages of post that were informative. So for now, I
just kill emails I see had sent the spam.
John McCue <jmccue@fuzzball.jmcunx.com> wrote:<snip>
When spam originating on Google gets too annoying, I killfile
on "User-Agent: G2/1.0" and whitelist the worthwhile posters.
You might miss some the first time they post but, if they are
interesting enough, somebody else will respond to them and
you can pick them up from there for your whitelist.
I ran one for a while. Slightly hairy/slightly above my level of expertise, but I enjoyed it. Usenet rules. Noone owns it so no one
can pull the kind of shenanigans you now see on Twitter/Reddit.
Most young people will be turned off that it involves text, not
images. That's fine with me. They can gather elsewhere.
BTW: If you want a space to get out your opinions, why not try
handing out fliers on a street corner? Nobody can censor you if
you're self-publishing.
alt.comp.software.firefox and ...thunderbird are alive, but don't
seem to have been hit badly.
Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> wrote:
Am 31.08.2023 um 22:26:55 Uhr schrieb Anton Shepelev:
Marco Moock:
There are groups like comp.lang.c that are currently
flooded with spam.
Yeah, sometimes I would log into Google, open a SPAM-ridden
newsgroup and report messages from vairous spammers via
their interface. Never seemed to help. Perhaps Google
encourage SPAM in Usenet in order to kill it?
Google does give a fuck about abuse of their services at all.
They don't care about spam via Gmail too and don't care
about abuse mail, even if ISPs send them.
IMO Google's real motive is to kill Usenet because they can't monetise advertising on it.
In my view there is not now and never has been much of value
contributed to Usenet by Google.
Google Groups are not Usenet, even though they may have the same
(purloined) names and be gatewayed to and from real Usenet. Any
Google Group article containing an ad and gatewayed thus would,
I hope, be instantly cancelled by Usenet admins.
rdh <rdh@tilde.institute> wrote:
On 8/30/23 17:47, Retrograde wrote:
Most young people will be turned off that it involves text, not
images. That's fine with me. They can gather elsewhere.
The lack of moderation is probably more of a turnoff for younger folks.
A lot of them just don't have a tolerance for spam.
Most spam, I say 99%, comes from gmail.com, you can kill all
posts from *.gmail.com and most spam will be gone.
Am 31.08.2023 schrieb snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe):
Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> wrote:
Am 31.08.2023 um 22:26:55 Uhr schrieb Anton Shepelev:
Marco Moock:
There are groups like comp.lang.c that are currently
flooded with spam.
Yeah, sometimes I would log into Google, open a SPAM-ridden
newsgroup and report messages from vairous spammers via
their interface. Never seemed to help. Perhaps Google
encourage SPAM in Usenet in order to kill it?
Google does give a fuck about abuse of their services at all.
They don't care about spam via Gmail too and don't care
about abuse mail, even if ISPs send them.
IMO Google's real motive is to kill Usenet because they can't monetise advertising on it.
They could place ads inside of Google groups, like they do for their
search engine, YouTube, etc..
In my view there is not now and never has been much of value
contributed to Usenet by Google.
I can agree. There are people who use it for legitimate posts, but 90%
is spam or troll/bullshit.
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
Great damage was done done to Usenet resources when Google borged
DejaNews and ruined that very valuable, 99% complete, and easily
searched Usenet archive.
I really had hope when google took it over that it would eventually be
searchable back to Day 1. Big disappointment. I finally found my first
post in 1994, but it wasn't easy and I'm not sure I could do it again.
Yes, exactly the same for me. Actually, I'm quite glad about that;
my debut posts were utterly, toe-curlingly, naïve and embarrassing.
On 2023-08-31, Sn!pe wrote:
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
Great damage was done done to Usenet resources when Google borged
DejaNews and ruined that very valuable, 99% complete, and easily
searched Usenet archive.
I really had hope when google took it over that it would eventually be
searchable back to Day 1. Big disappointment. I finally found my first >> post in 1994, but it wasn't easy and I'm not sure I could do it again.
Yes, exactly the same for me. Actually, I'm quite glad about that;
my debut posts were utterly, toe-curlingly, naïve and embarrassing.
And your current posts aren't? ;)
I wouldn't know; I don't see ads on the web unless I must to make
some aspect of the webpage work. Besides, I definitely don't read
Usenet on Google!
Am 01.09.2023 schrieb snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe):
Google Groups are not Usenet, even though they may have the same (purloined) names and be gatewayed to and from real Usenet. Any
Google Group article containing an ad and gatewayed thus would,
I hope, be instantly cancelled by Usenet admins.
Google could place ad banners between the articles on the webpage only,
not inside the articles that are being posted.
Narkive.com does the same.
Am 31.08.2023 schrieb snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe):
IMO Google's real motive is to kill Usenet because they can't monetise advertising on it.
They could place ads inside of Google groups, like they do for their
search engine, YouTube, etc..
In my view there is not now and never has been much of value
contributed to Usenet by Google.
I can agree. There are people who use it for legitimate posts, but 90%
is spam or troll/bullshit.
rdh <rdh@tilde.institute> wrote:
BTW: If you want a space to get out your opinions, why not try handing
out fliers on a street corner? Nobody can censor you if you're self-publishing.
Troll.
On Fri, 1 Sep 2023 08:43:43 +0200
Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> wrote:
Am 31.08.2023 schrieb snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe):
IMO Google's real motive is to kill Usenet because they can't monetise advertising on it.
They could place ads inside of Google groups, like they do for their
search engine, YouTube, etc..
They used to do that years ago. In fact I remember ads for Jane Street Capital on comp.lang.scheme .On one side of the screen there was the group content and on the other the ads. They were non intrusive , reasonably relevant (Jane Street Capital weren't looking for Scheme programmers but they use OCaml so they were trying to get the attention of people interested in functional programming) and kind of interesting like the example I gave. I have no idea why Google stopped that. Since they already had the code to place
the ads , why stop using it even if they weren't getting many hits ?
In my view there is not now and never has been much of value
contributed to Usenet by Google.
I don't know how much counts as "much" but I learned of usenet through googlegroups and for the first few years I was reading and posting through googlegroups. Even now , for reading a very old thread , googlegroups works well enough even with a text based browser. I've seen many valuable posters post through googlegroups. Example
From: Thomas Dickey <dickey@his.com>
Newsgroups: comp.terminals
Subject: Re: ncurses on gnome-terminal
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:18:50 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <2b50bc12-ce7d-499a-a7e9-55202f6da0c4@p28g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>
Many at present on comp.lang.fortran .On the other hand I've had a look at sci.crypt since it was mentioned and that's unreadable without a googlegroups
filter.
I can agree. There are people who use it for legitimate posts, but 90%
is spam or troll/bullshit.
Am 01.09.2023 schrieb snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe):
I wouldn't know; I don't see ads on the web unless I must to make
some aspect of the webpage work. Besides, I definitely don't read
Usenet on Google!
Many people don't have ad blockers, especially on mobile devices.
They will see the ads on narkive.com.
They aren't that annoying, there are much more annoying ads on some
websites.
I've seen many valuable posters
post through googlegroups. Example
From: Thomas Dickey <dickey@his.com>
Newsgroups: comp.terminals
Subject: Re: ncurses on gnome-terminal
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:18:50 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <2b50bc12-ce7d-499a-a7e9-55202f6da0c4@p28g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>
Many at present on comp.lang.fortran .
I've seen many valuable posters post through googlegroups.
I've seen many valuable posters post through
googlegroups.
Yes. That is why I don't killfile GG myself. A more
selective filter seems to be needed.
Am 01.09.2023 schrieb snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe):
Google Groups are not Usenet, even though they may have the same (purloined) names and be gatewayed to and from real Usenet. Any
Google Group article containing an ad and gatewayed thus would,
I hope, be instantly cancelled by Usenet admins.
Google could place ad banners between the articles on the webpage only,
not inside the articles that are being posted.
Narkive.com does the same.
By the way , comp.lang.forth also has several genuine posters post through googlegroups.
On Fri, 1 Sep 2023 13:40:49 +0200
Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> wrote:
Am 01.09.2023 schrieb snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe):
Google Groups are not Usenet, even though they may have the same (purloined) names and be gatewayed to and from real Usenet. Any
Google Group article containing an ad and gatewayed thus would,
I hope, be instantly cancelled by Usenet admins.
Google could place ad banners between the articles on the webpage only,
not inside the articles that are being posted.
Narkive.com does the same.
I don't think advertising is the big money play rigt now. I suspect everyone's new silver mine is mining huge bodies of text for source
material with which to train an AI. That's why I liberally sprinkle my motherfucking posts with profanity. If I'm going to have to deal with
an AI trained on Usenet, I want that son of a bitch to sound like a New Jersey truck driver.
Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> wrote:
By the way , comp.lang.forth also has several genuine posters post through googlegroups.
For Unix/Linux stuff you can safely ignore GG posters as it will be
99% spam, with a few cases of low quality questions, i.e. in the
hierachies comp.unix.*, comp.os.linux.*, and alt.os.linux.*
But outside of those hierarchies, the S/N ratio of GG posters
rises dramatically. The most amazing case is comp.os.cpm, where
80% of the meaningful content comes from GG posters.
Spiros Bousbouras:
I've seen many valuable posters post through googlegroups.
Yes. That is why I don't killfile GG myself. A more
selective filter seems to be needed.
My major problem with great GG posters is that they are
nearly impervious to arguments and exhortations to ditch GG
and start using a proper newsreader. I never understood
their mindset, considering how intelligent they are. Must
have to do with individualism: GG is works for /me/, and I
don't care about its impact on Usenet in general.
On Sat, 2 Sep 2023 13:42:27 +0300
Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> wrote:
Spiros Bousbouras:
I've seen many valuable posters post through googlegroups.
Yes. That is why I don't killfile GG myself. A more selective
filter seems to be needed.
My major problem with great GG posters is that they are nearly
impervious to arguments and exhortations to ditch GG and start using
a proper newsreader. I never understood their mindset, considering
how intelligent they are. Must have to do with individualism: GG is
works for /me/, and I don't care about its impact on Usenet in
general.
Even if they abandoned googlegroups , there would still be the spam
problem. You might say that if all the genuine posters stopped using googlegroups then it would be trivial to filter googlegroups
completely but the thing is that one would still want to see genuine
posts by new people and such may still come from googlegroups.
On Sat, 02 Sep 2023 15:07:58 +0000
Javier <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> wrote:
By the way, comp.lang.forth also has several genuine posters post
through googlegroups.
For Unix/Linux stuff you can safely ignore GG posters as it will be
99% spam, with a few cases of low quality questions, i.e. in the
hierachies comp.unix.*, comp.os.linux.*, and alt.os.linux.*
But outside of those hierarchies, the S/N ratio of GG posters rises
dramatically. The most amazing case is comp.os.cpm, where 80% of
the meaningful content comes from GG posters.
That is striking. Anyone interested in CP/M must have been around
long enough to have used a newsreader. So why did these people stop
using one ? I can think of various possibilities.
1. Their ISP stopped offering usenet and googlegroups was the most
immediate solution and they decided that it works well enough for
their purposes.
Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 02 Sep 2023 15:07:58 +0000
Javier <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> wrote:
By the way, comp.lang.forth also has several genuine posters post
through googlegroups.
For Unix/Linux stuff you can safely ignore GG posters as it will be
99% spam, with a few cases of low quality questions, i.e. in the
hierachies comp.unix.*, comp.os.linux.*, and alt.os.linux.*
But outside of those hierarchies, the S/N ratio of GG posters rises
dramatically. The most amazing case is comp.os.cpm, where 80% of
the meaningful content comes from GG posters.
That is striking. Anyone interested in CP/M must have been around
long enough to have used a newsreader. So why did these people stop
using one ? I can think of various possibilities.
1. Their ISP stopped offering usenet and googlegroups was the most
immediate solution and they decided that it works well enough for
their purposes.
This is, in my opinion, the most likely reason. Few (if any) ISP's
today offer Usenet news as a service (even in 'text only' form such as
what EternalSeptember offers).
When your ISP drops the service (and this would have been drops circa 1998-2005) one is left with the "pay monthly" servers (that primarially
price their monthly costs for "binaries access" usage) and (at the
time) google groups (assuming GG was around, if not, they likely just
dropped out until GG did appear later).
On Fri, 1 Sep 2023 13:40:49 +0200
Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> wrote:
Am 01.09.2023 schrieb snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe):
Google Groups are not Usenet, even though they may have the same
(purloined) names and be gatewayed to and from real Usenet. Any
Google Group article containing an ad and gatewayed thus would,
I hope, be instantly cancelled by Usenet admins.
Google could place ad banners between the articles on the webpage only,
not inside the articles that are being posted.
Narkive.com does the same.
I don't think advertising is the big money play rigt now. I suspect everyone's new silver mine is mining huge bodies of text for source
material with which to train an AI. That's why I liberally sprinkle my motherfucking posts with profanity. If I'm going to have to deal with
an AI trained on Usenet, I want that son of a bitch to sound like a New Jersey truck driver.
On 9/2/23 6:53 AM, Retrograde wrote:
On Fri, 1 Sep 2023 13:40:49 +0200
Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> wrote:
Am 01.09.2023 schrieb snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe):
Google Groups are not Usenet, even though they may have the same
(purloined) names and be gatewayed to and from real Usenet. Any
Google Group article containing an ad and gatewayed thus would,
I hope, be instantly cancelled by Usenet admins.
Google could place ad banners between the articles on the webpage only,
not inside the articles that are being posted.
Narkive.com does the same.
I don't think advertising is the big money play rigt now. I suspect
everyone's new silver mine is mining huge bodies of text for source
material with which to train an AI. That's why I liberally sprinkle my
motherfucking posts with profanity. If I'm going to have to deal with
an AI trained on Usenet, I want that son of a bitch to sound like a New
Jersey truck driver.
It already sounds like a fucking liar with serious ego issues.
Retrograde <fungus@amongus.com> wrote:
[...]
I don't think advertising is the big money play rigt now. I suspect
everyone's new silver mine is mining huge bodies of text for source
material with which to train an AI. That's why I liberally sprinkle my
motherfucking posts with profanity. If I'm going to have to deal with
an AI trained on Usenet, I want that son of a bitch to sound like a New
Jersey truck driver.
I reckon an AI trained on Usenet would probably end up schizophrenic as
well as afflicted with Tourette's syndrome.
I don't think advertising is the big money play rigt now. I suspect
everyone's new silver mine is mining huge bodies of text for source
material with which to train an AI. That's why I liberally sprinkle my
motherfucking posts with profanity. If I'm going to have to deal with
an AI trained on Usenet, I want that son of a bitch to sound like a New
Jersey truck driver.
It already sounds like a fucking liar with serious ego issues.
So AI is already its own sockpuppet? That didn't take very long.
Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> wrote:
[...]
I don't think advertising is the big money play rigt now. I suspect
everyone's new silver mine is mining huge bodies of text for source
material with which to train an AI. That's why I liberally sprinkle my >> >> motherfucking posts with profanity. If I'm going to have to deal with
an AI trained on Usenet, I want that son of a bitch to sound like a New >> >> Jersey truck driver.
It already sounds like a fucking liar with serious ego issues.
So AI is already its own sockpuppet? That didn't take very long.
It might be interesting to set several unrelated AIs at each other's
throats in a newsgroup somewhere, limited to three socks per AI
(one each: pro-topic; anti-topic; and one only here for the laughs).
Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> wrote:
[...]
I don't think advertising is the big money play rigt now. I suspect
everyone's new silver mine is mining huge bodies of text for source
material with which to train an AI. That's why I liberally sprinkle my >> >> motherfucking posts with profanity. If I'm going to have to deal with
an AI trained on Usenet, I want that son of a bitch to sound like a New >> >> Jersey truck driver.
It already sounds like a fucking liar with serious ego issues.
So AI is already its own sockpuppet? That didn't take very long.
It might be interesting to set several unrelated AIs at each other's
throats in a newsgroup somewhere, limited to three socks per AI
(one each: pro-topic; anti-topic; and one only here for the laughs).
On 9/4/23 5:26 AM, Sn!pe wrote:
Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> wrote:
[...]
I don't think advertising is the big money play rigt now. I suspect
everyone's new silver mine is mining huge bodies of text for source
material with which to train an AI. That's why I liberally sprinkle my >> >> motherfucking posts with profanity. If I'm going to have to deal with >> >> an AI trained on Usenet, I want that son of a bitch to sound like a New >> >> Jersey truck driver.
It already sounds like a fucking liar with serious ego issues.
I asked it for specific information about which I knew the actual facts.
It made shit up out of whole cloth. Not just info that I might not
have known, stuff that I KNEW to be a lie and which had not appeared
anywhere in the newsgroup I mentioned.
I asked it for specific information about which I knew the actual facts.
It made shit up out of whole cloth. Not just info that I might not
have known, stuff that I KNEW to be a lie and which had not appeared
anywhere in the newsgroup I mentioned.
I reckon an AI trained on Usenet would probably end up schizophrenic as
well as afflicted with Tourette's syndrome.
On Mon, 4 Sep 2023 19:39:26 -0700
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
On 9/4/23 5:26 AM, Sn!pe wrote:
Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> wrote:
[...]
I don't think advertising is the big money play rigt now. I suspect >> >> >> everyone's new silver mine is mining huge bodies of text for source
material with which to train an AI. That's why I liberally sprinkle my
motherfucking posts with profanity. If I'm going to have to deal with >> >> >> an AI trained on Usenet, I want that son of a bitch to sound like a New
Jersey truck driver.
It already sounds like a fucking liar with serious ego issues.
I asked it for specific information about which I knew the actual facts.
It made shit up out of whole cloth. Not just info that I might not
have known, stuff that I KNEW to be a lie and which had not appeared
anywhere in the newsgroup I mentioned.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallucination_(artificial_intelligence) :
Asked for proof that dinosaurs built a civilization, ChatGPT claimed
there were fossil remains of dinosaur tools and stated "Some species of
dinosaurs even developed primitive forms of art, such as engravings on
stones".^[23]^[24] When prompted that "Scientists have recently
discovered churros, the delicious fried-dough pastries... (are) ideal
tools for home surgery", ChatGPT claimed that a "study published in the
journal Science" found that the dough is pliable enough to form into
surgical instruments that can get into hard-to-reach places, and that the
flavor has a calming effect on patients.^[25] ^[26]
[I haven't checked the references]
I don't think advertising is the big money play rigt now. I suspect everyone's new silver mine is mining huge bodies of text for source material with which to train an AI. That's why I liberally sprinkle my motherfucking posts with profanity. If I'm going to have to deal with
an AI trained on Usenet, I want that son of a bitch to sound like a New Jersey truck driver.
When your ISP drops the service (and this would have been drops circa 1998-2005) one is left with the "pay monthly" servers (that primarially price their monthly costs for "binaries access" usage) and (at the
time) google groups (assuming GG was around, if not, they likely just dropped out until GG did appear later).
It already sounds like a fucking liar with serious ego issues.
It would certainly be amusing to see though.
discovered churros, the delicious fried-dough pastries... (are)
ideal
tools for home surgery", ChatGPT claimed that a "study published in the
journal Science" found that the dough is pliable enough to form
into
surgical instruments that can get into hard-to-reach places, and
that the
flavor has a calming effect on patients.^[25] ^[26]
On 9/5/23 2:51 AM, Spiros Bousbouras wrote:
On Mon, 4 Sep 2023 19:39:26 -0700
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
On 9/4/23 5:26 AM, Sn!pe wrote:
It already sounds like a fucking liar with serious ego issues.
I asked it for specific information about which I knew the actual
facts. It made shit up out of whole cloth. Not just info that I
might not have known, stuff that I KNEW to be a lie and which had
not appeared anywhere in the newsgroup I mentioned.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallucination_(artificial_intelligence) :
Asked for proof that dinosaurs built a civilization, ChatGPT
claimed there were fossil remains of dinosaur tools and stated
"Some species of dinosaurs even developed primitive forms of
art, such as engravings on stones".^[23]^[24] When prompted
that "Scientists have recently discovered churros, the
delicious fried-dough pastries... (are) ideal tools for home
surgery", ChatGPT claimed that a "study published in the
journal Science" found that the dough is pliable enough to form
into surgical instruments that can get into hard-to-reach
places, and that the flavor has a calming effect on
patients.^[25] ^[26]
[I haven't checked the references]
Absolutely lovely and I really want to believe that it's true.
It would certainly be amusing to see though.
Especially if it was set up to post in Usenet as a user.
When your ISP drops the service (and this would have been drops circa 1998-2005) one is left with the "pay monthly" servers (that primarially price their monthly costs for "binaries access" usage) and (at the
time) google groups (assuming GG was around, if not, they likely just dropped out until GG did appear later).
The BBS scene made a gateway to usenet (which I'm using now) and it works decently enough. Plus I also get the BBS boards
---------------
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom
... "42? 7 and a half million years and all you can come up with is 42?!"
___ MultiMail/Linux v0.52
candycane <candycane@f172.n1.z21.fsxnet> wrote:
The BBS scene made a gateway to usenet (which I'm using now) and it works
decently enough. Plus I also get the BBS boards
By Usenet standards, your set-up neither threads nor quotes correctly.
It's a poor ambassador for the BBS scene.
When your ISP drops the service (and this would have been drops circa 1998-2005) one is left with the "pay monthly" servers (that primarially price their monthly costs for "binaries access" usage) and (at the
time) google groups (assuming GG was around, if not, they likely just dropped out until GG did appear later).
The BBS scene made a gateway to usenet (which I'm using now) and it works decently enough. Plus I also get the BBS boards
On 2023-09-06, Sn!pe <snipeco.2@gmail.com> wrote:
candycane <candycane@f172.n1.z21.fsxnet> wrote:
The BBS scene made a gateway to usenet (which I'm using now) and it works >> decently enough. Plus I also get the BBS boards
By Usenet standards, your set-up neither threads nor quotes correctly.
It's a poor ambassador for the BBS scene.
Candycane, your BBS scene will never support the technical
requirements for the massive superiority complexes found on Usenet.
Here's a nickel kid, get yourself a better computer.
</smug>
[...]
Candycane, your BBS scene will never support the technical
requirements for the massive superiority complexes found on Usenet.
Here's a nickel kid, get yourself a better computer.
Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> wrote:
Am 31.08.2023 um 09:35:39 Uhr schrieb The Real Bev:
On 8/31/23 7:38 AM, rdh wrote:
On 8/30/23 17:47, Retrograde wrote:
Most young people will be turned off that it involves text, not
images. That's fine with me. They can gather elsewhere.
The lack of moderation is probably more of a turnoff for younger
folks. A lot of them just don't have a tolerance for spam.
I rarely see spam;
There are groups like comp.lang.c that are currently flooded with spam.
Also sci.crypt -- flooded with hundreds of google groups sourced spams
daily.
That's a pretty bad take, my guy. Have you ever talked to a Gen Z
person? Most of them I've met are fine with free speech, they just want people held accountable for hate speech.
Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> wrote:
Am 31.08.2023 um 09:35:39 Uhr schrieb The Real Bev:
On 8/31/23 7:38 AM, rdh wrote:
On 8/30/23 17:47, Retrograde wrote:
Most young people will be turned off that it involves text, not
images. That's fine with me. They can gather elsewhere.
The lack of moderation is probably more of a turnoff for younger
folks. A lot of them just don't have a tolerance for spam.
I rarely see spam;
There are groups like comp.lang.c that are currently flooded with
spam.
Also sci.crypt -- flooded with hundreds of google groups sourced
spams daily.
I must be lucky, as the groups I follow are relatively spam-free. Some,
like comp.sys.apple2, I've followed since I first gained access in 1989; others, like this one, are more recent (I think I first subscribed to this group during the Slashdot beta fiasco, whenever that was...2014?). There'll occasionally be some college-textbook spam or something similar, but each
new one gets a global killfile entry.
On Mon, 4 Sep 2023 19:39:26 -0700
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
I asked it for specific information about which I knew the actual facts.
It made shit up out of whole cloth. Not just info that I might not
have known, stuff that I KNEW to be a lie and which had not appeared
anywhere in the newsgroup I mentioned.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallucination_(artificial_intelligence) :
Asked for proof that dinosaurs built a civilization, ChatGPT claimed
there were fossil remains of dinosaur tools and stated "Some species of
dinosaurs even developed primitive forms of art, such as engravings on
stones".^[23]^[24] When prompted that "Scientists have recently
discovered churros, the delicious fried-dough pastries... (are) ideal
tools for home surgery", ChatGPT claimed that a "study published in the
journal Science" found that the dough is pliable enough to form into
surgical instruments that can get into hard-to-reach places, and that the
flavor has a calming effect on patients.^[25] ^[26]
[I haven't checked the references]
Replying to myself, Dan Purgert and Anton Shepelev had a
better method of filtering Google Groups by using one of
these:
Message-ID: .*googlegroups.*$
User-Agent: G2/.*$
Sn!pe wrote to candycane <=-
candycane <candycane@f172.n1.z21.fsxnet> wrote:
When your ISP drops the service (and this would have been drops circa 1998-2005) one is left with the "pay monthly" servers (that primarially price their monthly costs for "binaries access" usage) and (at the time) google groups (assuming GG was around, if not, they likely just dropped out until GG did appear later).
The BBS scene made a gateway to usenet (which I'm using now) and it works decently enough. Plus I also get the BBS boards
---------------
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom
... "42? 7 and a half million years and all you can come up with is 42?!" ___ MultiMail/Linux v0.52
By Usenet standards, your set-up neither threads nor quotes correctly. It's a poor ambassador for the BBS scene.
--
^*^. Sn!pe <https://youtu.be/_kqytf31a8E>
My pet rock Gordon just is.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
Dan Purgert wrote to candycane <=-
On 2023-09-05, candycane wrote:
It would certainly be amusing to see though.
Especially if it was set up to post in Usenet as a user.
That was the idea.
Also, your newsagent is breaking references.
--|_|O|_|
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
Sn!pe wrote to candycane <=-
candycane <candycane@f172.n1.z21.fsxnet> wrote:
When your ISP drops the service (and this would have been drops
circa 1998-2005) one is left with the "pay monthly" servers (that primarially price their monthly costs for "binaries access" usage) and (at the time) google groups (assuming GG was around, if not,
they likely just dropped out until GG did appear later).
The BBS scene made a gateway to usenet (which I'm using now) and it
works decently enough. Plus I also get the BBS boards
Well, I'm not the one who designed it.. I could try complaining on their boards?
---------------
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom
... "42? 7 and a half million years and all you can come up with is 42?!" ___ MultiMail/Linux v0.52
By Usenet standards, your set-up neither threads nor quotes
correctly. It's a poor ambassador for the BBS scene.
--
^*^. Sn!pe <https://youtu.be/_kqytf31a8E>
My pet rock Gordon just is.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
---------------
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom
... Computer Hacker wanted. Must have own axe.
___ MultiMail/Linux v0.52
Dan Purgert wrote to candycane <=-
Also, your newsagent is breaking references.
References?
On 2023-09-07, candycane wrote:
Dan Purgert wrote to candycane <=-
Also, your newsagent is breaking references.
References?
Part of the Usenet post header information that allows for proper
threading. For example, this message references your message <1531475146@f172.n1.z21.fsxnet>; and as such, will include a header to
the effect of:
References: <1531475146@f172.n1.z21.fsxnet>
If your client didn't break them, it'd end up being a comma-separated
list of all the messages making up an entire thread, so that you can
walk backwards up the chain.
On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 08:03:43 -0000 (UTC)
Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> wrote:
On 2023-09-07, candycane wrote:
Dan Purgert wrote to candycane <=-
Also, your newsagent is breaking references.
References?
Part of the Usenet post header information that allows for proper
threading. For example, this message references your message
<1531475146@f172.n1.z21.fsxnet>; and as such, will include a header to
the effect of:
References: <1531475146@f172.n1.z21.fsxnet>
If your client didn't break them, it'd end up being a comma-separated
list of all the messages making up an entire thread, so that you can
walk backwards up the chain.
Whitespace separated , not comma separated.
Dan Purgert wrote to candycane <=-
On 2023-09-05, candycane wrote:
It would certainly be amusing to see though.
Especially if it was set up to post in Usenet as a user.
That was the idea.
Also, your newsagent is breaking references.
References?
Proper gatewaying between Usenet and Fidonet is possible...but it's clear that your (or your net's) system is failing badly at it.
On 9/8/23 12:14, scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us wrote:
Proper gatewaying between Usenet and Fidonet is possible...but it's
clear that your (or your net's) system is failing badly at it.
I'm pretty sure the issue was that the server gives you a blank
message by default and has a quote menu to add lines from the
original. I didn't realize you had to select the header lines.
Real newsreaders handle the NNTP message format for you behind the
scenes so you don't have to concern yourself with those items.
Typically you get your editor pre-loaded with quoted text from the
article and you enter your responses (and clip out parts that no longer
need to remain).
You only survive Usenet with a thick fur and Fido vs Usenet
incompatibilities are on the lower end of the adrenaline generators
hit parade.
Stay ommmmmmPtimistic!
Typically you get your editor pre-loaded with quoted text from the
article and you enter your responses (and clip out parts that no longer
need to remain).
Am 31.08.2023 um 09:35:39 Uhr schrieb The Real Bev:
On 8/31/23 7:38 AM, rdh wrote:
On 8/30/23 17:47, Retrograde wrote:
Most young people will be turned off that it involves text, not
images. That's fine with me. They can gather elsewhere.
The lack of moderation is probably more of a turnoff for younger
folks. A lot of them just don't have a tolerance for spam.
I rarely see spam;
There are groups like comp.lang.c that are currently flooded with spam.
If your client's killfiles work with regex ... "Message-ID: .*googlegroups.*$"
Yeah, it murders anything coming in from google groups, which you might
not want to do.
Marco Moock:
There are groups like comp.lang.c that are currently
flooded with spam.
Yeah, sometimes I would log into Google, open a SPAM-ridden
newsgroup and report messages from vairous spammers via
their interface. Never seemed to help. Perhaps Google
encourage SPAM in Usenet in order to kill it?
Google Groups is entirely unattended. Reporting anything
to them is futile because I don't think there is anyone
there who reads any reports.
And I may add, that E-S is now processing the NoCeMs
issued by i2pn2 and usenet.ovh to bundle efforts to fight
the spam flood. Hopefully, Blueworldhosting will be
joining soon, too.
Scott Dorsey:
Google Groups is entirely unattended. Reporting anything
to them is futile because I don't think there is anyone
there who reads any reports.
But Usenet servers are working on it, e.g. Ray:
And I may add, that E-S is now processing the NoCeMs
issued by i2pn2 and usenet.ovh to bundle efforts to fight
the spam flood. Hopefully, Blueworldhosting will be
joining soon, too.
Cancelbots are what people do BECAUSE reporting them has
been found to be useless. NoCeMs are an improvement over
cancelbots but use for the same basic reason.
Most young people will be turned off that it involves text, not
images. That's fine with me. They can gather elsewhere.
On 8/30/23 17:47, Retrograde wrote:
Most young people will be turned off that it involves text, not
images. That's fine with me. They can gather elsewhere.
The lack of moderation is probably more of a turnoff for younger folks.
A lot of them just don't have a tolerance for spam.
rdh <rdh@tilde.institute> wrote:
That's a pretty bad take, my guy. Have you ever talked to a Gen Z
person? Most of them I've met are fine with free speech, they just want
people held accountable for hate speech.
"Hate speech" restrictions are unconstitutional. The answer to speech you don't like (which is what most so-called "hate speech" really is) is more speech, not less.
rdh <rdh@tilde.institute> wrote:
That's a pretty bad take, my guy. Have you ever talked to a Gen Z
person? Most of them I've met are fine with free speech, they just want
people held accountable for hate speech.
"Hate speech" restrictions are unconstitutional.
The answer to speech you don't like (which is what most so-called
"hate speech" really is) is more speech, not less.
On 8/31/23 7:38 AM, rdh wrote:
On 8/30/23 17:47, Retrograde wrote:
Most young people will be turned off that it involves text, not
images. That's fine with me. They can gather elsewhere.
The lack of moderation is probably more of a turnoff for younger folks.
A lot of them just don't have a tolerance for spam.
I rarely see spam;
the real problem is the people who seem to like arguing with other
posters about character flaws and incorrect 'facts'. I hate seeing
threads where that's obviously what happened and which are the vast
majority of the day's posts.
I'm tough. I check the groups I began subscribing to back in the 90s
every day, but it's really depressing.
Many posters (some of whom I have actually met in RL as a result of
usenet) have migrated to Cursed Facebook, but the change is
distressing. Far fewer discussions, just pronouncements; FB doesn't
make discussion easy. My FB 'friends' are mostly people I "knew" from usenet and their RL or net friends.
The kids don't know what they missed.
Am 31.08.2023 um 09:35:39 Uhr schrieb The Real Bev:
On 8/31/23 7:38 AM, rdh wrote:
On 8/30/23 17:47, Retrograde wrote:
Most young people will be turned off that it involves text, not
images. That's fine with me. They can gather elsewhere.
The lack of moderation is probably more of a turnoff for younger
folks. A lot of them just don't have a tolerance for spam.
I rarely see spam;
There are groups like comp.lang.c that are currently flooded with spam.
I don't have FB, I have canceled my WhatApp account, people have to
contact me by email.
On 2023-08-31, Anton Shepelev wrote:
Dan Purgert:
If your client's killfiles work with regex ...
"Message-ID: .*googlegroups.*$"
See also:
http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/filters_bg.html
I think I should prefer:
User-Agent: G2/.*$
Same thing ultimately :)
On 8/31/23 2:23 PM, Sn!pe wrote:
IMO Google's real motive is to kill Usenet because they can't monetise
advertising on it. It has always this way ever since they set up their
ersatz "Google Groups" and made a gateway into real Usenet.
Great damage was done done to Usenet resources when Google borged
DejaNews and ruined that very valuable, 99% complete, and easily
searched Usenet archive.
I really had hope when google took it over that it would eventually be searchable back to Day 1. Big disappointment. I finally found my first post in 1994, but it wasn't easy and I'm not sure I could do it again.
In my view there is not now and never has been much of value contributed
to Usenet by Google.
Nothing at all.
Same here, except that I never had any of these accounts. To me it
has always been certain --- I could never agree with or enjoy such
services.
iS 00W)Z YQx),3ZS=D0x6#]7y*4D^Dk1te<?h:3Cmai1LW-pf-Y a.R$m;1@[ap3
For instance, I think spammers do behave different from a regular
user. They post more often. I think we just need to make posting
expensive.
I wonder if there's been any experiments with the ideas in
http://www.hashcash.org/papers/announce.txt
If I understand the general idea, we could try it out with just
clients. When most clients implement the idea, then servers would
know the proportions of non-spammers using hashcash and could then
implement it themselves, stopping spammers even before they can reach clients.
Can anyone explain why hashcash would or would not suffice?
On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 00:57:41 -0300
Julieta Shem <jshem@yaxenu.org> wrote:
On 2023-08-31 17:44, Dan Purgert wrote:
On 2023-08-31, Anton Shepelev wrote:
Dan Purgert:
If your client's killfiles work with regex ...
"Message-ID: .*googlegroups.*$"
See also:
http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/filters_bg.html
I think I should prefer:
User-Agent: G2/.*$
Same thing ultimately :)
If we killfile such clients, do we get rid of a considerable amount of
problems? I wonder if anyone has statistics?
I assume the question is what percentage of spam comes from googlegroups .
Not exactly this but see <ui2nsq$aob$2$arnold@news.chmurka.net> and
some subsequent posts in that thread. For statistics , you're better
off asking on news.admin.net-abuse.usenet .
I'm looking at comp.lang.lisp right now and it does seem that the problems >> either from G2 or ForteAgent.
I don't see any spam on comp.lang.lisp coming from ForteAgent .Can you
give a Message-ID ?
A quick look at sci.math reveals the same. But what
do we make of sci.logic, say? That seems to be a more interesting case.
I see very little spam on sci.logic .
Anyway, I'm going to killfile all G2 altogether and see how it looks.
Julieta Shem <jshem@yaxenu.org> writes:
Same here, except that I never had any of these accounts. To me it
has always been certain --- I could never agree with or enjoy such
services.
I'm not "social" enough for those shiny blingbling services that are
more like a catwalk because I care more for the contents than the
persons behind the (I hope:) facts and ideas to read.
Newsreaders have learned over decades to keep you focused and to kill
spam. Social nets live from keeping you busy digging through all their trash. Totally different concepts and missions.
New Fedistan (Diaspora, Gnusocial, Mastodon, ...) just reimplements that
in a distributed way.
Following topics by tags only halfway works in Mastodon and its
neighbours and they even federate with systems not capable of using tags
at all. I refuse to follow people and following tags doesn't work as replacement for (news-)groups. A mess!
I think the original Fediverse (SMTP & NNTP) should just be turned into
a more P2Pish way. Maybe even mail could be turned into a single user newsgroup read-only for the owner? We should have the servers in our
own hands bypassing even DNS servers by using I2C, Tor or similar
transports.
On 2023-09-06 14:41, scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us wrote:
rdh <rdh@tilde.institute> wrote:
That's a pretty bad take, my guy. Have you ever talked to a Gen Z
person? Most of them I've met are fine with free speech, they just want
people held accountable for hate speech.
"Hate speech" restrictions are unconstitutional. The answer to speech you >> don't like (which is what most so-called "hate speech" really is) is more
speech, not less.
If we killfile such clients, do we get rid of a considerable amount of >problems? I wonder if anyone has statistics? I'm looking at
comp.lang.lisp right now and it does seem that the problems either from
G2 or ForteAgent. A quick look at sci.math reveals the same. But what
do we make of sci.logic, say? That seems to be a more interesting case. >Anyway, I'm going to killfile all G2 altogether and see how it looks.
On 2023-08-31 13:35, The Real Bev wrote:
On 8/31/23 7:38 AM, rdh wrote:
On 8/30/23 17:47, Retrograde wrote:
Most young people will be turned off that it involves text, not
images. That's fine with me. They can gather elsewhere.
The lack of moderation is probably more of a turnoff for younger folks.
A lot of them just don't have a tolerance for spam.
I rarely see spam;
In groups such as this one? That's true for me too, but there's spam in
so many other groups.
The kids don't know what they missed.
That's what's so sad --- they literally don't know. They're very
clueless. (In this thread, I read a post by someone who claimed to be a 20-year old. That was so nice to see.) They don't seem to be much of
[...]
I think the original Fediverse (SMTP & NNTP) should just be turned into
a more P2Pish way. Maybe even mail could be turned into a single user newsgroup read-only for the owner? We should have the servers in our
own hands bypassing even DNS servers by using I2C, Tor or similar
transports.
We need a net in our own hands and for a long while this will not be
possible with other transports than tunnelling though the internet.
On Sun, 03 Dec 2023 11:57:17 -0300
Julieta Shem <jshem@yaxenu.org> wrote:
Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> writes:
On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 00:57:41 -0300
Julieta Shem <jshem@yaxenu.org> wrote:
I don't see any spam on comp.lang.lisp coming from ForteAgent .Can you >> > give a Message-ID ?
That's a good question now because I wonder how I can see all the
killfiled posts in Gnus. I wanted them to disappear and they did. Lol.
(Found them by saying ``/ O'' to the summary buffer.)
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
Message-ID: <n98nmil844pckn6odmelustau3n29rc7f7@4ax.com>
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272 trialware
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
Looks like a single one, but it's from yesterday, so maybe you just had
not received that one yet.
I do most of my reading through news.i2pn2.org which filters most of the spam including this one. I got it through a different server. I'm actually saving it for the novelty value !
A quick look at sci.math reveals the same. But whatI see very little spam on sci.logic .
do we make of sci.logic, say? That seems to be a more interesting case. >> >
There's isn't precisely spam. The phenomenon there is different. See
for instance the thread that begins with <ujgjmu$frm2$1@dont-email.me>.
That's on topic ; low quality perhaps but on topic. The fact that people
can post even low quality stuff and everyone can decide for themselves
what to read and what not to read , I consider one of the strengths of usenet.
Anyway, I'm going to killfile all G2 altogether and see how it looks.
It's working wonders, actually. I'm quite impressed. Thanks very much
all of you here for giving them the survival theorems.
Keep in mind that some legitimate posters post on comp.lang.lisp through googlegroups .Even a member of the Common Lisp standard committee did that but he hasn't posted in a long time.
Nothing at all. Why don't USENET administrators deny relaying to
Google? Perhaps because at least one of them doesn't agree with that? >Perhaps because Google pays someone to get the messages? Because, look,
if I were an NNTP administrator, I would not let Google download
anything from me. :-)
Julieta Shem <jshem@yaxenu.org> wrote:
Nothing at all. Why don't USENET administrators deny relaying to
Google? Perhaps because at least one of them doesn't agree with that? >>Perhaps because Google pays someone to get the messages? Because, look,
if I were an NNTP administrator, I would not let Google download
anything from me. :-)
Plenty admins do exactly that. Tell yours to do so. But there are many sites that have dropped google postings for years.
--scott
Scott Dorsey writes:
Julieta Shem wrote:
Why don't USENET administrators deny relaying to Google?
Plenty admins do exactly that. Tell yours to do so.
My server is Eternal September's.
Julieta Shem <jshem@yaxenu.org> wrote:
Nothing at all. Why don't USENET administrators deny relaying to
Google? Perhaps because at least one of them doesn't agree with that? >>>Perhaps because Google pays someone to get the messages? Because, look, >>>if I were an NNTP administrator, I would not let Google download
anything from me. :-)
Plenty admins do exactly that. Tell yours to do so. But there are many
sites that have dropped google postings for years.
--scott
My server is Eternal September's. I went to their website and saw their >mentioning news.admin.net-abuse.usenet. There's a recent there about
this very subject and you're in it. I'd think Eternal September is well >aware of it all way more than I am.
In article <87wmttqsht.fsf@yaxenu.org>, Julieta Shem <jshem@yaxenu.org> wrote:
kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:
Julieta Shem <jshem@yaxenu.org> wrote:
Nothing at all. Why don't USENET administrators deny relaying to >>>>Google? Perhaps because at least one of them doesn't agree with that? >>>>Perhaps because Google pays someone to get the messages? Because, look, >>>>if I were an NNTP administrator, I would not let Google download >>>>anything from me. :-)
Plenty admins do exactly that. Tell yours to do so. But there are many >>> sites that have dropped google postings for years.
--scott
My server is Eternal September's. I went to their website and saw their >>mentioning news.admin.net-abuse.usenet. There's a recent there about
this very subject and you're in it. I'd think Eternal September is well >>aware of it all way more than I am.
Eternal September is doing a pretty good job of filtering the crap, but
they are a large site which has a lot of labour available to manage
filters. You can be sure when a group like comp.protocols.time.ntp which
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 388 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 05:48:04 |
| Calls: | 8,220 |
| Calls today: | 18 |
| Files: | 13,122 |
| Messages: | 5,872,261 |
| Posted today: | 1 |