Katy Jennison is another RR who doesn't seem to be here
any more. I still see her sometimes on Facebook.
Yes, but she specifically announced that she was leaving.
[Followup-To: comp.misc]
Athel Cornish-Bowden to Steve Hayes:
Katy Jennison is another RR who doesn't seem to be here
any more. I still see her sometimes on Facebook.
Yes, but she specifically announced that she was leaving.
There is an epidemic abroad of people leaving clean, stable,
accessible, and independent venues such as Usenet, Fidonet,
Mailing lists, and IRC, for centralised capitalist
corporate-owned cenusured commercial "products" that are
huge, bloated, tasteless, and require up-to-date hardware,
OS, and software. To me, this is a reiteration of the story
of the red pottage[1]: selling one's freedom and cleanliness
for immediate comfort.
____________________
1. Genesis 25, 25-34.
On Wed, 24 Jul 2024, Anton Shepelev wrote:
[Followup-To: comp.misc]
Athel Cornish-Bowden to Steve Hayes:
Katy Jennison is another RR who doesn't seem to be here
any more. I still see her sometimes on Facebook.
Yes, but she specifically announced that she was leaving.
There is an epidemic abroad of people leaving clean, stable,
accessible, and independent venues such as Usenet, Fidonet,
Mailing lists, and IRC, for centralised capitalist
corporate-owned cenusured commercial "products" that are
huge, bloated, tasteless, and require up-to-date hardware,
OS, and software. To me, this is a reiteration of the story
of the red pottage[1]: selling one's freedom and cleanliness
for immediate comfort.
____________________
1. Genesis 25, 25-34.
It is a shame, but when I walk the city streets and see the young with
their faces in their smart phones, I am not surprised. You get all the
evils as preinstalled little icons, and the good stuff requires a few
hoops to jump through.
But I do wonder if there will be a movement away from the corporate
islands eventually?
On 7/24/24 2:08 AM, D wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jul 2024, Anton Shepelev wrote:
[Followup-To: comp.misc]
Athel Cornish-Bowden to Steve Hayes:
Katy Jennison is another RR who doesn't seem to be here
any more. I still see her sometimes on Facebook.
Yes, but she specifically announced that she was leaving.
There is an epidemic abroad of people leaving clean, stable,
accessible, and independent venues such as Usenet, Fidonet,
Mailing lists, and IRC, for centralised capitalist
corporate-owned cenusured commercial "products" that are
huge, bloated, tasteless, and require up-to-date hardware,
OS, and software. To me, this is a reiteration of the story
of the red pottage[1]: selling one's freedom and cleanliness
for immediate comfort.
It is a shame, but when I walk the city streets and see the young with
their faces in their smart phones, I am not surprised. You get all the
evils as preinstalled little icons, and the good stuff requires a few
hoops to jump through.
But I do wonder if there will be a movement away from the corporate
islands eventually?
How would that work? The aforementioned young are too stupid to realize how trapped they are and/or too ignorant to do anything about it if they DO figure it out. The rest of us are just too damn tired :-(
There is an epidemic abroad of people leaving clean, stable,
accessible, and independent venues such as Usenet, Fidonet, Mailing
lists, and IRC, for centralised capitalist corporate-owned cenusured commercial "products" that are huge, bloated, tasteless, and require up-to-date hardware, OS, and software. To me, this is a reiteration of
the story of the red pottage[1]: selling one's freedom and cleanliness
for immediate comfort.
____________________
1. Genesis 25, 25-34.
On Wed, 24 Jul 2024, The Real Bev wrote:
On 7/24/24 2:08 AM, D wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jul 2024, Anton Shepelev wrote:
[Followup-To: comp.misc]
Athel Cornish-Bowden to Steve Hayes:
Katy Jennison is another RR who doesn't seem to be here
any more. I still see her sometimes on Facebook.
Yes, but she specifically announced that she was leaving.
There is an epidemic abroad of people leaving clean, stable,
accessible, and independent venues such as Usenet, Fidonet,
Mailing lists, and IRC, for centralised capitalist
corporate-owned cenusured commercial "products" that are
huge, bloated, tasteless, and require up-to-date hardware,
OS, and software. To me, this is a reiteration of the story
of the red pottage[1]: selling one's freedom and cleanliness
for immediate comfort.
It is a shame, but when I walk the city streets and see the young with
their faces in their smart phones, I am not surprised. You get all the
evils as preinstalled little icons, and the good stuff requires a few
hoops to jump through.
But I do wonder if there will be a movement away from the corporate
islands eventually?
How would that work? The aforementioned young are too stupid to realize how >> trapped they are and/or too ignorant to do anything about it if they DO
figure it out. The rest of us are just too damn tired :-(
A slow building up over time? Even if the majority is too stupid, perhaps there are a few who do see the light?
You may try to make them use more modern open solutions like Mastodon,
I've tried out mastodon and I don't like it. Only usable for chit-chat,
you can't open a "thread" in a new tab by middle click, so rather uncomfortable to use.
The content is also mostly non-interesting, like Twitter. Some people
who hate Elon Musk now moved to mastodon and post their bullshit there.
On 25.07.2024 um 11:49 Uhr George Musk wrote:
You may try to make them use more modern open solutions like Mastodon,
I've tried out mastodon and I don't like it. Only usable for chit-chat,
you can't open a "thread" in a new tab by middle click, so rather uncomfortable to use.
The content is also mostly non-interesting, like Twitter. Some people
who hate Elon Musk now moved to mastodon and post their bullshit there.
Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> writes:
I've tried out mastodon and I don't like it. Only usable for chit-chat,
you can't open a "thread" in a new tab by middle click, so rather
uncomfortable to use.
The content is also mostly non-interesting, like Twitter. Some people
who hate Elon Musk now moved to mastodon and post their bullshit there.
I only can halfway bear Mastodon by ignoring the global timelines and
only focus on the local one of my preferred instance (emacs.ch), but
despite that I still need a break sometimes ('m in one right now).
D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jul 2024, The Real Bev wrote:
On 7/24/24 2:08 AM, D wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jul 2024, Anton Shepelev wrote:
[Followup-To: comp.misc]
Athel Cornish-Bowden to Steve Hayes:
Katy Jennison is another RR who doesn't seem to be here
any more. I still see her sometimes on Facebook.
Yes, but she specifically announced that she was leaving.
There is an epidemic abroad of people leaving clean, stable,
accessible, and independent venues such as Usenet, Fidonet,
Mailing lists, and IRC, for centralised capitalist
corporate-owned cenusured commercial "products" that are
huge, bloated, tasteless, and require up-to-date hardware,
OS, and software. To me, this is a reiteration of the story
of the red pottage[1]: selling one's freedom and cleanliness
for immediate comfort.
It is a shame, but when I walk the city streets and see the young with >>>> their faces in their smart phones, I am not surprised. You get all the >>>> evils as preinstalled little icons, and the good stuff requires a few
hoops to jump through.
But I do wonder if there will be a movement away from the corporate
islands eventually?
How would that work? The aforementioned young are too stupid to realize how
trapped they are and/or too ignorant to do anything about it if they DO
figure it out. The rest of us are just too damn tired :-(
A slow building up over time? Even if the majority is too stupid, perhaps
there are a few who do see the light?
This is how it almost always happens (i.e., anyone remember 'myspace'
from years ago)? And I've seen news articles that imply the shift is
already well underway for facebook. Apparently the "young crowd" (as
in the 20somethings and below) are all on Instagram because "facebook
is for old people" (i.e., their parents, aunts, uncles, etc. are on facebook).
Sadly, the young crowd is just trading one corporate devil for another equally bad corporate devil.
On 25.07.2024 um 11:49 Uhr George Musk wrote:
You may try to make them use more modern open solutions like
Mastodon,
I've tried out mastodon and I don't like it. Only usable for
chit-chat, you can't open a "thread" in a new tab by middle click,
...
Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> writes:
On 25.07.2024 um 11:49 Uhr George Musk wrote:
You may try to make them use more modern open solutions like Mastodon,
I've tried out mastodon and I don't like it. Only usable for chit-chat,
you can't open a "thread" in a new tab by middle click, so rather
uncomfortable to use.
The content is also mostly non-interesting, like Twitter. Some people
who hate Elon Musk now moved to mastodon and post their bullshit there.
That's what most people don't realize: most of these chat systems are no
good for conversation. People don't realize this because they also
can't really tell a good conversation from chit-chat. That's because a
good conversation requires thinking, but most people can't tell thinking
from brain activity. In other words, the underlying phenomenon is more worrying. We've reduced thinking quality in the large.
USENET is antiquated in some sense, but it's still the system where
people can write calmly with no distractions. Therefore USENET is still
the most adequate because there is no other system with these most
important features. As I'm writing this paragraph, there is nothing
flashing on my screen and nobody is waiting for me, so I can take all
the time I want. And that increases the quality of the conversation.
Here's an example. Most USENET clients maximize your writing screen.
Compare that with Whatsapp or Discord. You write your message in a
small region of the program, clearly implying that your writing is not important. What about all the flashing stuff? These programs all look
like a Christmas tree. If you read writers blogs, you will notice
sometimes they write about their tools and they talk about pens, paper, computers and text editors. The same applies to programmers and other technical people such as scientists. They all talk about not getting distracted with nonsense.
Good conversation is sort of the same. If you start an oral
conversation with someone and, say, the person goes off on some tangent
all the time, that conversation doesn't get very deep. (For most
people, perhaps, that's no problem because they don't even know what
depth is.) Getting off on tangents is not so bad on USENET because we
can easily backtrack a thread, say. Conversation in writing is
different from oral conversation. But the point is that not getting distracted is important in conversation or anything else that requires thinking.
Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
I've tried out mastodon and I don't like it. Only usable for
chit-chat, you can't open a "thread" in a new tab by middle click,
Any web dev that breaks middle click to open a link in a new tab should
never be allowed to work on any web projects ever again.
Sadly, the young crowd is just trading one corporate
devil for another equally bad corporate devil.
Rubbish! When I'm out in bars and night clubs, I get loads
of women by telling them I'm a regular usenet user!
I must get around to trying to build a web forum to NNTP
gateway one day, although It'll probably send me crazy
trying to keep up with scraping different forum platform
page layouts.
Computer Nerd Kev:
I must get around to trying to build a web forum to NNTP
gateway one day, although It'll probably send me crazy
trying to keep up with scraping different forum platform
page layouts.
In case you are building it for the heck of it, there is one
already:
<https://news.novabbs.org>
If, on the other hand, your ambition is a bridge between
real web forums and NNTP, there have been working
implementations in englishforums.com (many years ago) and
the Microsoft forums (via NNTPBridge, not so many years
ago). Both were abandoned, partly because forums do not
agree with NNTP either ideologically (centralisation)
physically (different message format).
D to Rich:
Sadly, the young crowd is just trading one corporate
devil for another equally bad corporate devil.
Rubbish! When I'm out in bars and night clubs, I get loads
of women by telling them I'm a regular usenet user!
It's not what you say, it's the way you say it.
On 7/25/24 8:38 AM, D wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jul 2024, Rich wrote:
D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jul 2024, The Real Bev wrote:
On 7/24/24 2:08 AM, D wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jul 2024, Anton Shepelev wrote:
[Followup-To: comp.misc]
Athel Cornish-Bowden to Steve Hayes:
Katy Jennison is another RR who doesn't seem to be here
any more. I still see her sometimes on Facebook.
Yes, but she specifically announced that she was leaving.
There is an epidemic abroad of people leaving clean, stable,
accessible, and independent venues such as Usenet, Fidonet,
Mailing lists, and IRC, for centralised capitalist
corporate-owned cenusured commercial "products" that are
huge, bloated, tasteless, and require up-to-date hardware,
OS, and software. To me, this is a reiteration of the story
of the red pottage[1]: selling one's freedom and cleanliness
for immediate comfort.
It is a shame, but when I walk the city streets and see the young with >>>>>> their faces in their smart phones, I am not surprised. You get all the >>>>>> evils as preinstalled little icons, and the good stuff requires a few >>>>>> hoops to jump through.
But I do wonder if there will be a movement away from the corporate >>>>>> islands eventually?
How would that work? The aforementioned young are too stupid to realize >>>>> how
trapped they are and/or too ignorant to do anything about it if they DO >>>>> figure it out. The rest of us are just too damn tired :-(
A slow building up over time? Even if the majority is too stupid, perhaps >>>> there are a few who do see the light?
This is how it almost always happens (i.e., anyone remember 'myspace'
from years ago)? And I've seen news articles that imply the shift is
already well underway for facebook. Apparently the "young crowd" (as
in the 20somethings and below) are all on Instagram because "facebook
is for old people" (i.e., their parents, aunts, uncles, etc. are on
facebook).
Sadly, the young crowd is just trading one corporate devil for another
equally bad corporate devil.
Rubbish! When I'm out in bars and night clubs, I get loads of women by
telling them I'm a regular usenet user!
Way to go, guy! I assume you also flash a wad.
Maybe 20 years ago I would chat with the people I rode up with on the ski-lift. 6 minutes. I asked them if they were involved with usenet and the skiing newsgroups. Not a single one for several years, maybe 120 rides per year. And this is before the ascendancy of facebook.
Most of the usenet people I've "known" since 1995 have switched to facebook, and a significant percentage of those have just disappeared. Some of us are still hanging in, though. Those are my facebook 'friends' along with RL friends and friends of friends. Mostly we all know who we are and some of us have even met each other IRL.
And if we really want to talk about stupid, there's always Nextdoor...
Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> wrote:
Computer Nerd Kev:
I must get around to trying to build a web forum to NNTP
gateway one day, although It'll probably send me crazy
trying to keep up with scraping different forum platform
page layouts.
In case you are building it for the heck of it, there is one
already:
<https://news.novabbs.org>
If, on the other hand, your ambition is a bridge between
real web forums and NNTP, there have been working
implementations in englishforums.com (many years ago) and
the Microsoft forums (via NNTPBridge, not so many years
ago). Both were abandoned, partly because forums do not
agree with NNTP either ideologically (centralisation)
physically (different message format).
Perhaps I was too vague, I'm talking about something run
separately from the forum operators, like Gwene does with RSS.
I described my ambitions better last year in news.software.nntp
when I asked about any existing projects (without receiving any
relevent suggestions). See below.
Later I found this project that might help as a basis for the forum
scraping aspect:
https://github.com/mikwielgus/forum-dl
Though I don't think I could rely on that project to be maintained
and keep up with forum platform changes, since a recent comment
from the author is:
"Sadly, I haven't had much time to continue this project as I'm
currently very busy with another one."
So I'd probably have to maintain something like it myself, which
might not be worth the pain.
Message-ID: <651b4c54@news.ausics.net>
Subject: Client-Side Bridge to Web Forums?
Newsgroups: news.software.nntp
Web forums keep annoying me more and more with bloated interfaces,
so I'm using them less and less, yet there's less and less to read
on Usenet too. So lately I've been considering, not entirely
seriously, writing a program to scrape specific web forums and
generate a news spool with the content of the forum's latest posts
for me to read (either locally, or perhaps remotely via NNTP).
Has anyone done this before? I know there are various web forum
platforms that support NNTP server-side, but I'm talking about web
forums hosted by other people who I have no association or
influence with. Has anyone done something that's purely a
client-side implementation?
Simple Machines Forum and Discourse are prime targets for me, maybe
phpBB too. Most don't have RSS enabled, or the feed only shows the
start of new posts. The ideal would be a system supporting scrapers
for multiple forum platforms which can be easily extended.
Support for posting would be nice, but read-only access in a news
reader (Tin) would be better than nothing.
I never had a facebook account, so my evolution went from brief usenet
in the late 90s, to BBS:s, to web forums for many years, and lately a
come back for usenet.
I think there is a small trickle of new people from the digital
minimalism movement.
Read only sounds very simple. I usually scrape in python with the requests library and the beautiful soup library. A simple scraping loop could look like this (modify per web board of course):
for page in range(100, 150):
html = requests.get("https://www.svt.se/text-tv/" + str(page))
soup = BeautifulSoup(html.text, 'html.parser')
div_bs4 = soup.find('div', {"class": "Content_screenreaderOnly__3Cnkp"})
try:
email_body += div_bs4.string + "\n"
except AttributeError:
None
So basically a range of pages, then loop over those pages,
D <nospam@example.net> writes:
[...]
I never had a facebook account, so my evolution went from brief usenet
in the late 90s, to BBS:s, to web forums for many years, and lately a
come back for usenet.
I think there is a small trickle of new people from the digital
minimalism movement.
Some people think of Stack Overflow as a certain replacement or
competitor for the USENET. But have you considered that perhaps they
could be getting near their end? With Google Groups leaving the USENET,
I wonder if the USENET will house the experts once again. Experts are
people who study. People who study do need to exchange ideas. These
trendy tools out there are obviously inadequate for experts. So there
must be the need for experts to communicate. And when we look at the
USENET today, it's doing great.
And if you're someone who has come back to the USENET, we can ask---why?
What happpened that brought you back? If you're not an outlier, then
perhaps you're an illustration of a relevant phenomenon.
On Thu, 25 Jul 2024, Johanne Fairchild wrote:
Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> writes:
On 25.07.2024 um 11:49 Uhr George Musk wrote:
You may try to make them use more modern open solutions like Mastodon,
I've tried out mastodon and I don't like it. Only usable for chit-chat,
you can't open a "thread" in a new tab by middle click, so rather
uncomfortable to use.
The content is also mostly non-interesting, like Twitter. Some people
who hate Elon Musk now moved to mastodon and post their bullshit there.
That's what most people don't realize: most of these chat systems are no
good for conversation. People don't realize this because they also
can't really tell a good conversation from chit-chat. That's because a
good conversation requires thinking, but most people can't tell thinking
from brain activity. In other words, the underlying phenomenon is more
worrying. We've reduced thinking quality in the large.
USENET is antiquated in some sense, but it's still the system where
people can write calmly with no distractions. Therefore USENET is still
the most adequate because there is no other system with these most
important features. As I'm writing this paragraph, there is nothing
flashing on my screen and nobody is waiting for me, so I can take all
the time I want. And that increases the quality of the conversation.
Here's an example. Most USENET clients maximize your writing screen.
Compare that with Whatsapp or Discord. You write your message in a
small region of the program, clearly implying that your writing is not
important. What about all the flashing stuff? These programs all look
like a Christmas tree. If you read writers blogs, you will notice
sometimes they write about their tools and they talk about pens, paper,
computers and text editors. The same applies to programmers and other
technical people such as scientists. They all talk about not getting
distracted with nonsense.
Good conversation is sort of the same. If you start an oral
conversation with someone and, say, the person goes off on some tangent
all the time, that conversation doesn't get very deep. (For most
people, perhaps, that's no problem because they don't even know what
depth is.) Getting off on tangents is not so bad on USENET because we
can easily backtrack a thread, say. Conversation in writing is
different from oral conversation. But the point is that not getting
distracted is important in conversation or anything else that requires
thinking.
Makes a lot of sense to me. I fear for the day that Microsoft and Google
will try to take away my email from me, by no longer allowing third party email operators, or making it very hard to be one.
D to Rich:
Sadly, the young crowd is just trading one corporate
devil for another equally bad corporate devil.
Rubbish! When I'm out in bars and night clubs, I get loads
of women by telling them I'm a regular usenet user!
It's not what you say, it's the way you say it.
D <nospam@example.net> wrote at 21:40 this Thursday (GMT):
On Thu, 25 Jul 2024, Johanne Fairchild wrote:
Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> writes:
On 25.07.2024 um 11:49 Uhr George Musk wrote:That's what most people don't realize: most of these chat systems are no >>> good for conversation. People don't realize this because they also
You may try to make them use more modern open solutions like Mastodon, >>>>I've tried out mastodon and I don't like it. Only usable for chit-chat, >>>> you can't open a "thread" in a new tab by middle click, so rather
uncomfortable to use.
The content is also mostly non-interesting, like Twitter. Some people
who hate Elon Musk now moved to mastodon and post their bullshit there. >>>
can't really tell a good conversation from chit-chat. That's because a
good conversation requires thinking, but most people can't tell thinking >>> from brain activity. In other words, the underlying phenomenon is more
worrying. We've reduced thinking quality in the large.
USENET is antiquated in some sense, but it's still the system where
people can write calmly with no distractions. Therefore USENET is still >>> the most adequate because there is no other system with these most
important features. As I'm writing this paragraph, there is nothing
flashing on my screen and nobody is waiting for me, so I can take all
the time I want. And that increases the quality of the conversation.
Here's an example. Most USENET clients maximize your writing screen.
Compare that with Whatsapp or Discord. You write your message in a
small region of the program, clearly implying that your writing is not
important. What about all the flashing stuff? These programs all look
like a Christmas tree. If you read writers blogs, you will notice
sometimes they write about their tools and they talk about pens, paper,
computers and text editors. The same applies to programmers and other
technical people such as scientists. They all talk about not getting
distracted with nonsense.
Good conversation is sort of the same. If you start an oral
conversation with someone and, say, the person goes off on some tangent
all the time, that conversation doesn't get very deep. (For most
people, perhaps, that's no problem because they don't even know what
depth is.) Getting off on tangents is not so bad on USENET because we
can easily backtrack a thread, say. Conversation in writing is
different from oral conversation. But the point is that not getting
distracted is important in conversation or anything else that requires
thinking.
Makes a lot of sense to me. I fear for the day that Microsoft and Google
will try to take away my email from me, by no longer allowing third party
email operators, or making it very hard to be one.
At the very least, you could still maybe use third party apps with
imap3?
As I'm writing this paragraph, there is nothing
flashing on my screen and nobody is waiting for me, so I can take all
the time I want.
Compare that with Whatsapp or Discord.
If you read writers blogs, you will notice
sometimes they write about their tools and they talk about pens, paper, >computers and text editors. The same applies to programmers and other >technical people such as scientists. They all talk about not getting >distracted with nonsense.
If you read writers blogs, you will notice >>sometimes they write about their tools and they talk about pens, paper, >>computers and text editors. The same applies to programmers and other >>technical people such as scientists. They all talk about not getting >>distracted with nonsense.
Is that why all these big-shot coders, wordsmiths, and scientists
are sticking around here in Usenet instead of using websites?
On 7/25/24 8:38 AM, D wrote:
Rubbish! When I'm out in bars and night clubs, I get loads of women by
telling them I'm a regular usenet user!
Way to go, guy! I assume you also flash a wad.
On 7/25/24 8:38 AM, D wrote:
Rubbish! When I'm out in bars and night clubs, I get loads of women by
telling them I'm a regular usenet user!
Way to go, guy! I assume you also flash a wad.
For bonus points, tell them you enjoy a good campaign of Dungeons and Dragons. Girls go nuts for guys that like D&D and Usenet too.
Let's translate that to ``the experts are not here''. The experts who
are in social networks seem to be a minority, so I conjecture that most >experts are off the radar, perhaps waiting for something better.
Johanne Fairchild <jfairchild@tudado.org> wrote or quoted:
Let's translate that to ``the experts are not here''. The experts who
are in social networks seem to be a minority, so I conjecture that most >>experts are off the radar, perhaps waiting for something better.
The experts used to be here.
Linux was announced in comp.os.minix. Tim Berners Lee published a
summary of the World Wide Web project to the alt.hypertext
newsgroup. Marc Andreessen announced Netscape in
comp.infosystems.www.users. The launch of AltaVista was announced in
biz.digital.announce. "Uncle Bob" wrote in comp.objects. Greg Egan
asked about the science for his SF novels in sci.physics.research.
Dennis Ritchie wrote in comp.lang.c. They just disappeared.
Johanne Fairchild <jfairchild@tudado.org> wrote or quoted:Just in case we're not on the same page, that's precisely what I was
Let's translate that to ``the experts are not here''. The experts who >>>are in social networks seem to be a minority, so I conjecture that most >>>experts are off the radar, perhaps waiting for something better.The experts used to be here.
saying too.
On 7/25/24 8:38 AM, D wrote:
Rubbish! When I'm out in bars and night clubs, I get loads of women by
telling them I'm a regular usenet user!
Way to go, guy! I assume you also flash a wad.
For bonus points, tell them you enjoy a good campaign of Dungeons and >Dragons. Girls go nuts for guys that like D&D and Usenet too.
Johanne Fairchild <jfairchild@tudado.org> wrote or quoted:
Let's translate that to ``the experts are not here''. The experts
who are in social networks seem to be a minority, so I conjecture
that most experts are off the radar, perhaps waiting for something
better.
The experts used to be here. Linux was announced in comp.os.minix.
Tim Berners Lee published a summary of the World Wide Web project to
the alt.hypertext newsgroup. Marc Andreessen announced Netscape in comp.infosystems.www.users. The launch of AltaVista was announced in biz.digital.announce. "Uncle Bob" wrote in comp.objects. Greg Egan
asked about the science for his SF novels in sci.physics.research.
Dennis Ritchie wrote in comp.lang.c. They just disappeared.
. . .The experts used to be here. Linux was announced in comp.os.minix.
The ‘expert’ conversations are still happening, just not on Usenet. You >can find them in mailing lists, blogs, issue trackers, papers, etc.
A core problem with Usenet is that you can’t exclude people whose net >contribution to a discussion is negative.
Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote or quoted:
ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) writes:. . .
The experts used to be here. Linux was announced in comp.os.minix.
The ‘expert’ conversations are still happening, just not on Usenet. You >> can find them in mailing lists, blogs, issue trackers, papers, etc.
BTW: I shouldn't be calling Linus Torvalds and the others
I mentioned “experts.” That would be a serious downgrade for
them! These folks are top-tier innovators. But yeah, there
were definitely experts back in the Usenet days, and some
of them are still around in certain Newsgroups.
A core problem with Usenet is that you can’t exclude people whose net
contribution to a discussion is negative.
Or maybe the real issue is the folks who think you can't just block
certain people out? Yeah, Usenet expects everyone to manage their
own filters. If someone’s bugging you, you can totally filter them
out of your feed. And if it drives you nuts to see how others respond
to them, just find a newsreader that lets you filter that too!
Heck, you can filter posts that have a specific word pattern in them!
But it’s not like there’s a central authority doing that for you.
In article <66a4642e$2$1439830$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
Retrograde <fungus@amongus.com.invalid> wrote:
On 7/25/24 8:38 AM, D wrote:
Rubbish! When I'm out in bars and night clubs, I get loads of women by >>>> telling them I'm a regular usenet user!
Way to go, guy! I assume you also flash a wad.
For bonus points, tell them you enjoy a good campaign of Dungeons and
Dragons. Girls go nuts for guys that like D&D and Usenet too.
Please move this thread to alt.drugs.i.am.totaly.wasted and rec.ponds
where it belongs.
--scott
[-- text/plain, encoding 8bit, charset: UTF-8, 35 lines --]
On Sat, 27 Jul 2024, Stefan Ram wrote:
Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote or quoted:
ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) writes:. . .
The experts used to be here. Linux was announced in comp.os.minix.
The ‘expert’ conversations are still happening, just not on Usenet. You
can find them in mailing lists, blogs, issue trackers, papers, etc.
BTW: I shouldn't be calling Linus Torvalds and the others
I mentioned “experts.” That would be a serious downgrade for
them! These folks are top-tier innovators. But yeah, there
were definitely experts back in the Usenet days, and some
of them are still around in certain Newsgroups.
A core problem with Usenet is that you can’t exclude people whose net
contribution to a discussion is negative.
Or maybe the real issue is the folks who think you can't just block
certain people out? Yeah, Usenet expects everyone to manage their
own filters. If someone’s bugging you, you can totally filter them
out of your feed. And if it drives you nuts to see how others respond
to them, just find a newsreader that lets you filter that too!
Heck, you can filter posts that have a specific word pattern in them!
But it’s not like there’s a central authority doing that for you.
That's what I thought too, but perhaps he meant that even if you filter
out, the person can just register a new account, change their handle, and continue?
That does raise the bar though, since it is a bit of a hassle to
register a new account every single time you would like to harass someone.
As for blocking or killfiling, works great for me.
Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote or quoted:
ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) writes:. . .
The experts used to be here. Linux was announced in comp.os.minix.
The ‘expert’ conversations are still happening, just not on Usenet. You >>can find them in mailing lists, blogs, issue trackers, papers, etc.
BTW: I shouldn't be calling Linus Torvalds and the others
I mentioned “experts.” That would be a serious downgrade for
them! These folks are top-tier innovators. But yeah, there
were definitely experts back in the Usenet days, and some
of them are still around in certain Newsgroups.
A core problem with Usenet is that you can’t exclude people whose net >>contribution to a discussion is negative.
Or maybe the real issue is the folks who think you can't just block
certain people out? Yeah, Usenet expects everyone to manage their own filters. If someone’s bugging you, you can totally filter them out of
your feed. And if it drives you nuts to see how others respond to
them, just find a newsreader that lets you filter that too! Heck, you
can filter posts that have a specific word pattern in them!
My point is that the “manage your own filters” model is a good candidate >for why almost everybody (expert or not) left Usenet.
I'm not really sure whether a HTML parser
library would be helpful or just a pointless extra layer of complexity.
So far I've just used regular expressions for scraping webpages.
That's what I thought too, but perhaps he meant that even if you filter
out, the person can just register a new account, change their handle, and
continue?
You don't need to register a new account to nymshift on USENET anymore.
When USENET accounts went commercial (or free for all) instead of being
tied to one's college/business account it became trivial to post as any
name you like, all from the same account.
But as most users are unaware of how to do so, most users don't
nymshift, and so killfiles do work.
The problem is that many people don't want to be bothered with managing
their own personal killfile and would rather that work be offloaded to
"the moderators" (which is mostly what they get on the centralized
forums) so they don't have to bother with it.
That does raise the bar though, since it is a bit of a hassle to
register a new account every single time you would like to harass someone. >>
As for blocking or killfiling, works great for me.
Because most folks don't nym-shift on a regular basis.
Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote or quoted:Do you get that for most people it looks like a waste of time?
My point is that the “manage your own filters” model is a good >>>candidate for why almost everybody (expert or not) left Usenet.That's a trip, 'cause I'm totally the "roll your own filters" kind of
guy.
Now, my system only shows me about two or three headlines from the
Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote or quoted:
ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) writes:
Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote or quoted:Do you get that for most people it looks like a waste of time?
My point is that the “manage your own filters” model is a good >>>>candidate for why almost everybody (expert or not) left Usenet.That's a trip, 'cause I'm totally the "roll your own filters" kind of >>>guy.
But for me, the whole point is just to save time! I used to get
tangled up in reading news about vanity or trivial stuff that had
zero relevance to me. There was this one news source where I'd
skim through about 40 headlines with article descriptions daily,
and end up reading stories about some bartender's teenage years.
Now, my system only shows me about two or three headlines from the
same source. I only need a fraction of the time. Sure, I had to put
in some time upfront to write my Python script, but it was worth it.
ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) writes:
Johanne Fairchild <jfairchild@tudado.org> wrote or quoted:
Let's translate that to ``the experts are not here''. The experts
who are in social networks seem to be a minority, so I conjecture
that most experts are off the radar, perhaps waiting for something
better.
The experts used to be here. Linux was announced in comp.os.minix.
Tim Berners Lee published a summary of the World Wide Web project to
the alt.hypertext newsgroup. Marc Andreessen announced Netscape in
comp.infosystems.www.users. The launch of AltaVista was announced in
biz.digital.announce. "Uncle Bob" wrote in comp.objects. Greg Egan
asked about the science for his SF novels in sci.physics.research.
Dennis Ritchie wrote in comp.lang.c. They just disappeared.
The ‘expert’ conversations are still happening, just not on Usenet. You can find them in mailing lists, blogs, issue trackers, papers, etc.
A core problem with Usenet is that you can’t exclude people whose net contribution to a discussion is negative.
Rich <rich@example.invalid> writes:
Stefan Ram <ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote or quoted: >>>>ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) writes:
Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote or quoted:Do you get that for most people it looks like a waste of time?
My point is that the “manage your own filters” model is a good >>>>>>candidate for why almost everybody (expert or not) left Usenet. >>>>>That's a trip, 'cause I'm totally the "roll your own filters" kind of >>>>>guy.
But for me, the whole point is just to save time! I used to get
tangled up in reading news about vanity or trivial stuff that had
zero relevance to me. There was this one news source where I'd
skim through about 40 headlines with article descriptions daily,
and end up reading stories about some bartender's teenage years.
Now, my system only shows me about two or three headlines from the
same source. I only need a fraction of the time. Sure, I had to put
in some time upfront to write my Python script, but it was worth it.
Except... The typical computer user thinks Python is a particular
kind of snake with scales and fangs.
The original context was the contemporary absence of ‘experts’ from Usenet; the examples cited are perfectly well able to distinguish
programming languages from reptiles.
Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote or quoted:
My point is that the “manage your own filters” model is a good >>>>>>candidate for why almost everybody (expert or not) left Usenet.
...Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote or quoted: >>>>ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) writes:
That's a trip, 'cause I'm totally the "roll your own filters" kind of >>>>>guy.Do you get that for most people it looks like a waste of time?
ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) writes:
Johanne Fairchild <jfairchild@tudado.org> wrote or quoted:
Let's translate that to ``the experts are not here''. The experts
who are in social networks seem to be a minority, so I conjecture
that most experts are off the radar, perhaps waiting for something
better.
The experts used to be here. Linux was announced in comp.os.minix.
Tim Berners Lee published a summary of the World Wide Web project to
the alt.hypertext newsgroup. Marc Andreessen announced Netscape in
comp.infosystems.www.users. The launch of AltaVista was announced in
biz.digital.announce. "Uncle Bob" wrote in comp.objects. Greg Egan
asked about the science for his SF novels in sci.physics.research.
Dennis Ritchie wrote in comp.lang.c. They just disappeared.
The ‘expert’ conversations are still happening, just not on Usenet. You can find them in mailing lists, blogs, issue trackers, papers, etc.
A core problem with Usenet is that you can’t exclude people whose net contribution to a discussion is negative. If you have absolutist ideas
about free speech then, or are part of the problem, that may be what you want. But if you actually want to get something useful done there are
better options available.
Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote or quoted:
ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) writes:. . .
The experts used to be here. Linux was announced in comp.os.minix.
The ‘expert’ conversations are still happening, just not on Usenet. You >>can find them in mailing lists, blogs, issue trackers, papers, etc.
BTW: I shouldn't be calling Linus Torvalds and the others
I mentioned “experts.” That would be a serious downgrade for
them! These folks are top-tier innovators. But yeah, there
were definitely experts back in the Usenet days, and some
of them are still around in certain Newsgroups.
A core problem with Usenet is that you can’t exclude people whose net >>contribution to a discussion is negative.
Or maybe the real issue is the folks who think you can't just block
certain people out? Yeah, Usenet expects everyone to manage their
own filters. If someone’s bugging you, you can totally filter them
out of your feed. And if it drives you nuts to see how others respond
to them, just find a newsreader that lets you filter that too!
Heck, you can filter posts that have a specific word pattern in them!
But it’s not like there’s a central authority doing that for you.
Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> writes:
A core problem with Usenet is that you can’t exclude people whose net
contribution to a discussion is negative. If you have absolutist
ideas about free speech then, or are part of the problem, that may be
what you want. But if you actually want to get something useful done
there are better options available.
I agree. I came to the conclusion that technical communities should be semi-closed. Like mailing lists, they can be open for reading, but
closed for writing. I like NNTP. I think that closing NNTP servers for writing is a good thing. I like the idea of getting an account by
invitation (from any other member). Perhaps we could have good
communities this way again.
They do exist, including closed NNTP networks, not just single servers.
Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
They do exist, including closed NNTP networks, not just single servers.
closed NNTP *networks* in 2024?
The only people I can think running those networks are SDF. And BTW
their private sdf.* hierarchy had very little activity (as I witnessed
myself a few years ago).
ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) writes:
Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote or quoted:
ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) writes:. . .
The experts used to be here. Linux was announced in comp.os.minix.
The ‘expert’ conversations are still happening, just not on Usenet. You
can find them in mailing lists, blogs, issue trackers, papers, etc.
BTW: I shouldn't be calling Linus Torvalds and the others
I mentioned “experts.” That would be a serious downgrade for
them! These folks are top-tier innovators. But yeah, there
were definitely experts back in the Usenet days, and some
of them are still around in certain Newsgroups.
Yes. ``Expert'' has been redefined.
A core problem with Usenet is that you can’t exclude people whose net
contribution to a discussion is negative.
Or maybe the real issue is the folks who think you can't just block
certain people out? Yeah, Usenet expects everyone to manage their
own filters. If someone’s bugging you, you can totally filter them
out of your feed. And if it drives you nuts to see how others respond
to them, just find a newsreader that lets you filter that too!
Heck, you can filter posts that have a specific word pattern in them!
But it’s not like there’s a central authority doing that for you.
It's true that NNTP is able to handle the job, but most people are not willing to be experts at using NNTP clients.
Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
They do exist, including closed NNTP networks, not just single servers.
closed NNTP *networks* in 2024? I cannot think of anything besides a
backup server of a private server.
Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
They do exist, including closed NNTP networks, not just single servers.
closed NNTP *networks* in 2024?
I cannot think of anything besides a backup server of a private
server.
Most people are not able to be experts at anything.
I'm ashamed to say that more and more I'm asking Gemini (and others)
how-to questions rather than doing an actual search
The problem is that many people don't want to be bothered with managing
their own personal killfile and would rather that work be offloaded to
"the moderators" (which is mostly what they get on the centralized
forums) so they don't have to bother with it.
Javier <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
They do exist, including closed NNTP networks, not just single servers.
closed NNTP *networks* in 2024? I cannot think of anything besides a
backup server of a private server.
By virtue of being *closed* it is unlikely you'd know about them.
If someone wanted a "team/slack" like ability for remote indivduals to communicate, they /could/ setup a close NNTP network for themselves.
Granted, the likelyhood is small and said team is more likely to setup msteams or slack -- but the *closed* nature means none of the rest of
us would know it existed.
Average people seem to want Slack or Discord a lot more than NNTP
servers.
Johanne Fairchild <jfairchild@tudado.org> wrote or quoted:
Average people seem to want Slack or Discord a lot more than NNTP
servers.
For comparison, a text from 2001:
|Since Usenet was created in 1979, it has seen an impressive
|growth from a small academic community to a network used by
|millions of people from a wide variety of backgrounds all
|over the world. The total size of the data flowing through
|Usenet has been more than tripling every year between 1993
|and 2001.
"Handling Information Overload on Usenet" (2001) - Jan IngvoldstadF.
For comparison, a text from 2001:
|Since Usenet was created in 1979, it has seen an impressive |growth
from a small academic community to a network used by |millions of people
from a wide variety of backgrounds all |over the world. The total size
of the data flowing through |Usenet has been more than tripling every
year between 1993 |and 2001.
"Handling Information Overload on Usenet" (2001) - Jan Ingvoldstad.
On Wed, 24 Jul 2024, Anton Shepelev wrote:
[Followup-To: comp.misc]
Athel Cornish-Bowden to Steve Hayes:
Katy Jennison is another RR who doesn't seem to be here
any more. I still see her sometimes on Facebook.
Yes, but she specifically announced that she was leaving.
There is an epidemic abroad of people leaving clean, stable,
accessible, and independent venues such as Usenet, Fidonet,
Mailing lists, and IRC, for centralised capitalist
corporate-owned cenusured commercial "products" that are
huge, bloated, tasteless, and require up-to-date hardware,
OS, and software. To me, this is a reiteration of the story
of the red pottage[1]: selling one's freedom and cleanliness
for immediate comfort.
____________________
1. Genesis 25, 25-34.
It is a shame, but when I walk the city streets and see the young with
their faces in their smart phones, I am not surprised. You get all the
evils as preinstalled little icons, and the good stuff requires a few
hoops to jump through.
But I do wonder if there will be a movement away from the corporate
islands eventually?
D <nospam@example.net> wrote in news:fdc6b7b9-b22a-0fa3-83c7-1710be288c51 @example.net:
On Wed, 24 Jul 2024, Anton Shepelev wrote:
[Followup-To: comp.misc]
Athel Cornish-Bowden to Steve Hayes:
Katy Jennison is another RR who doesn't seem to be here
any more. I still see her sometimes on Facebook.
Yes, but she specifically announced that she was leaving.
There is an epidemic abroad of people leaving clean, stable,
accessible, and independent venues such as Usenet, Fidonet,
Mailing lists, and IRC, for centralised capitalist
corporate-owned cenusured commercial "products" that are
huge, bloated, tasteless, and require up-to-date hardware,
OS, and software. To me, this is a reiteration of the story
of the red pottage[1]: selling one's freedom and cleanliness
for immediate comfort.
____________________
1. Genesis 25, 25-34.
It is a shame, but when I walk the city streets and see the young with
their faces in their smart phones, I am not surprised. You get all the
evils as preinstalled little icons, and the good stuff requires a few
hoops to jump through.
But I do wonder if there will be a movement away from the corporate
islands eventually?
I use USENET and foreign web sites to keep abreast of many things.
My wife uses her iPhone and Facebook for what she considers news.
Last week I pointed out to her the stories and opinions she thought were hours old were actually weeks old, older, or just plein inaccurate. I had
to go over several news stories and alleged governement feedback responses with her and verify the dates and untruths from other more reliable resourses.
That got her looking at a few new web sites, but she still relies on her biased FB feed to tell her what is going on.
Her initial inquiry to me was asking why Google had suddenly started giving her very biased political reporting and not mentioning her hobby news. It was a Google reset. She had to retrain her account to give her what she wanted.
I'm happy reading all sides of stories and deciding for myself what is true and what needs to be verified elsewhere before repeating it.
What happens when there are no more toolmakers?
On 8/6/24 6:55 AM, Stefan Ram wrote:
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote or quoted:
What happens when there are no more toolmakers?Well, if by "toolmakers" you mean those devs cranking out text
editors, search engines, or AI chatbots: We're swimming in them these
days, more than ever before in human history! So I'd say: I'll cross
that bridge when I come to it, if we ever actually run low on those
folks. (Sure, some tech fields are hurting for talent, but that's
probably not because of the new AI chatbots hitting the scene.)
I mean people who have serious work to do and know how to make a
computer do it for them. REAL experts. If there are only people who
know how to use the tools already provided for them, who will make NEW
tools?
"Don't you wish there were a knob on the TV to turn up the
intelligence? There's one marked "brightness", but it
doesn't work." -- Gallagher
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> writes:
On 8/6/24 6:55 AM, Stefan Ram wrote:
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote or quoted:
What happens when there are no more toolmakers?Well, if by "toolmakers" you mean those devs cranking out text
editors, search engines, or AI chatbots: We're swimming in them these
days, more than ever before in human history! So I'd say: I'll cross
that bridge when I come to it, if we ever actually run low on those
folks. (Sure, some tech fields are hurting for talent, but that's
probably not because of the new AI chatbots hitting the scene.)
I mean people who have serious work to do and know how to make a
computer do it for them. REAL experts. If there are only people who
know how to use the tools already provided for them, who will make NEW
tools?
Obviously nobody. But it’s a hypothetical situation which isn’t about to >happen.
A CS professor I know told me this last week:
I'm one of the very few that teach Systems. It amazes me that our
PhD students almost all in AI have never heard of a program
counter.
On 07 Aug 2024 15:04:21 GMT, Aharon Robbins wrote:
A CS professor I know told me this last week:
I'm one of the very few that teach Systems. It amazes me that our
PhD students almost all in AI have never heard of a program
counter.
“Program counter” ... is that a von Neumann thing?
Don't be sure. A CS professor I know told me this last week:
I'm one of the very few that teach Systems. It amazes me that
our PhD students almost all in AI have never heard of a program
counter.
Scary times. I'm glad I retire from software development in a few years.
On 07 Aug 2024 15:04:21 GMT, Aharon Robbins wrote:
A CS professor I know told me this last week:
I'm one of the very few that teach Systems. It amazes me that our
PhD students almost all in AI have never heard of a program
counter.
“Program counter” ... is that a von Neumann thing?
On 2024-08-07, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On 07 Aug 2024 15:04:21 GMT, Aharon Robbins wrote:
A CS professor I know told me this last week:
I'm one of the very few that teach Systems. It amazes me that our
PhD students almost all in AI have never heard of a program
counter.
“Program counter” ... is that a von Neumann thing?
It's the thing that holds the address of the current instruction being executed.
Effectively, CPU's operate like this loop here
int pc=0;
while (1) {
execute_instruction (pc);
pc++;
}
After that, 'execute_instruction' can be thought of as a big conditional statement that actually performs the task -- moving data between CPU registers, reading from RAM, whatever.
[-- text/plain, encoding 8bit, charset: UTF-8, 36 lines --]
On Thu, 8 Aug 2024, Dan Purgert wrote:
On 2024-08-07, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On 07 Aug 2024 15:04:21 GMT, Aharon Robbins wrote:
A CS professor I know told me this last week:
I'm one of the very few that teach Systems. It amazes me
that our PhD students almost all in AI have never heard of a
program counter.
“Program counter” ... is that a von Neumann thing?
It's the thing that holds the address of the current instruction
being executed.
Effectively, CPU's operate like this loop here
int pc=0;
while (1) {
execute_instruction (pc);
pc++;
}
After that, 'execute_instruction' can be thought of as a big
conditional statement that actually performs the task -- moving data
between CPU registers, reading from RAM, whatever.
Could it have been called instruction counter on some platforms? My
memory is very hazy but I vaguely remember a register you could
manipulate directly from my assembler labs and the long gone days
when I thought computer viruses were interesting.
It's the thing that holds the address of the current instruction beingCould it have been called instruction counter on some platforms? My
executed.
Effectively, CPU's operate like this loop here
int pc=0; while (1) {
execute_instruction (pc);
pc++;
}
After that, 'execute_instruction' can be thought of as a big
conditional statement that actually performs the task -- moving data
between CPU registers, reading from RAM, whatever.
memory is very hazy but I vaguely remember a register you could
manipulate directly from my assembler labs and the long gone days when I thought computer viruses were interesting.
On 2024-08-07, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On 07 Aug 2024 15:04:21 GMT, Aharon Robbins wrote:
A CS professor I know told me this last week:
I'm one of the very few that teach Systems. It amazes me that
our PhD students almost all in AI have never heard of a program
counter.
“Program counter” ... is that a von Neumann thing?
It's the thing that holds the address of the current instruction being executed.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On 07 Aug 2024 15:04:21 GMT, Aharon Robbins wrote:
A CS professor I know told me this last week:
I'm one of the very few that teach Systems. It amazes me that
our PhD students almost all in AI have never heard of a program
counter.
“Program counter” ... is that a von Neumann thing?
Turing.
On Thu, 8 Aug 2024 09:33:10 -0000 (UTC), Dan Purgert wrote:
On 2024-08-07, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On 07 Aug 2024 15:04:21 GMT, Aharon Robbins wrote:
A CS professor I know told me this last week:
I'm one of the very few that teach Systems. It amazes me that
our PhD students almost all in AI have never heard of a program
counter.
“Program counter” ... is that a von Neumann thing?
It's the thing that holds the address of the current instruction being
executed.
Like I said, it’s a von Neumann thing.
Pretty sure my AVR Microcontrollers are Harvard Architecture ...
D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
[-- text/plain, encoding 8bit, charset: UTF-8, 36 lines --]
On Thu, 8 Aug 2024, Dan Purgert wrote:
On 2024-08-07, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On 07 Aug 2024 15:04:21 GMT, Aharon Robbins wrote:
A CS professor I know told me this last week:
I'm one of the very few that teach Systems. It amazes me
that our PhD students almost all in AI have never heard of a
program counter.
“Program counter” ... is that a von Neumann thing?
It's the thing that holds the address of the current instruction
being executed.
Effectively, CPU's operate like this loop here
int pc=0;
while (1) {
execute_instruction (pc);
pc++;
}
After that, 'execute_instruction' can be thought of as a big
conditional statement that actually performs the task -- moving data
between CPU registers, reading from RAM, whatever.
Could it have been called instruction counter on some platforms? My
memory is very hazy but I vaguely remember a register you could
manipulate directly from my assembler labs and the long gone days
when I thought computer viruses were interesting.
Some architectures named it "program counter", others used the name "instruction pointer", still others likely used "instruction counter".
If one searched through much of computer architecture history I'd say
one could find a least a half dozen names for it (used by different architectures) if not more.
On 8/7/24 12:57 AM, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> writes:
On 8/6/24 6:55 AM, Stefan Ram wrote:
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote or quoted:
What happens when there are no more toolmakers?Well, if by "toolmakers" you mean those devs cranking out text
editors, search engines, or AI chatbots: We're swimming in them these
days, more than ever before in human history! So I'd say: I'll cross
that bridge when I come to it, if we ever actually run low on those
folks. (Sure, some tech fields are hurting for talent, but that's
probably not because of the new AI chatbots hitting the scene.)
I mean people who have serious work to do and know how to make a
computer do it for them. REAL experts. If there are only people who
know how to use the tools already provided for them, who will make NEW
tools?
Obviously nobody. But it’s a hypothetical situation which isn’t about to >> happen.
I'm not so sure. I look at the general dumbing down of our (and apparently non-USA) population and wonder if there are enough intelligent people left to make a difference. Look at the schools. Loot at the governments. Look at the media. Is there any reason to be optimistic?
On 8 Aug 2024 09:21:29 -0000, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On 07 Aug 2024 15:04:21 GMT, Aharon Robbins wrote:
A CS professor I know told me this last week:
I'm one of the very few that teach Systems. It amazes me that
our PhD students almost all in AI have never heard of a program
counter.
“Program counter” ... is that a von Neumann thing?
Turing.
The Turing Machine never had a “program counter”.
In article <v93ln7$b31t$6@dont-email.me>, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On 8 Aug 2024 09:21:29 -0000, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On 07 Aug 2024 15:04:21 GMT, Aharon Robbins wrote:
A CS professor I know told me this last week:
I'm one of the very few that teach Systems. It amazes me that
our PhD students almost all in AI have never heard of a
program counter.
“Program counter” ... is that a von Neumann thing?
Turing.
The Turing Machine never had a “program counter”.
It's the tape position.
Web forums keep annoying me more and more with bloated interfaces,
so I'm using them less and less, yet there's less and less to read
on Usenet too. So lately I've been considering, not entirely
seriously, writing a program to scrape specific web forums and
generate a news spool with the content of the forum's latest posts
for me to read (either locally, or perhaps remotely via NNTP).
Has anyone done this before? I know there are various web forum
platforms that support NNTP server-side, but I'm talking about web
forums hosted by other people who I have no association or
influence with. Has anyone done something that's purely a
client-side implementation?
Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote:
Web forums keep annoying me more and more with bloated interfaces,
so I'm using them less and less, yet there's less and less to read
on Usenet too. So lately I've been considering, not entirely
seriously, writing a program to scrape specific web forums and
generate a news spool with the content of the forum's latest posts
for me to read (either locally, or perhaps remotely via NNTP).
Has anyone done this before? I know there are various web forum
platforms that support NNTP server-side, but I'm talking about web
forums hosted by other people who I have no association or
influence with. Has anyone done something that's purely a
client-side implementation?
There's a mobile app called Tapatalk, which hooks into a number of web
forums to make them mobile friendly, including posting. I think they have plugins for various platforms like phpBB, which forum operators can install to get access to their forum from mobiles. If you see postings on a forum that include text like 'Sent from my Samsung SM-GT9711QB via Tapatalk' then that forum is Tapatalk enabled (or was at the time of posting).
It's been a decade or more since I looked at it, but thinking was that it might be possible to hook into the Tapatalk interface and get some kind of access to the raw forum database, rather than scraping the forum's web page.
Tapatalk still seems to be a thing, but use of phpBB and similar forums has declined. Maybe they have plugins for Discourse and friends now?
Anyway, it might be worth digging into the Tapatalk protocol and seeing if there's a way to hook into it from outside the Tapatalk ecosystem. I have
no idea if it's possible.
On 8/9/24 1:28 PM, D wrote:
On Fri, 9 Aug 2024, The Real Bev wrote:
On 8/7/24 12:57 AM, Richard Kettlewell wrote:In my case... short term no, long term, yes. We've survived, as a
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> writes:
On 8/6/24 6:55 AM, Stefan Ram wrote:Obviously nobody. But it’s a hypothetical situation which isn’t
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote or quoted:I mean people who have serious work to do and know how to make a
What happens when there are no more toolmakers?Well, if by "toolmakers" you mean those devs cranking out text
editors, search engines, or AI chatbots: We're swimming in them these >>>>>> days, more than ever before in human history! So I'd say: I'll cross >>>>>> that bridge when I come to it, if we ever actually run low on those >>>>>> folks. (Sure, some tech fields are hurting for talent, but that's
probably not because of the new AI chatbots hitting the scene.)
computer do it for them. REAL experts. If there are only people who >>>>> know how to use the tools already provided for them, who will make NEW >>>>> tools?
about to
happen.
I'm not so sure. I look at the general dumbing down of our (and
apparently non-USA) population and wonder if there are enough
intelligent people left to make a difference. Look at the
schools. Loot at the governments. Look at the media. Is there any
reason to be optimistic?
species,
world wars, famines, pestilence. Anything we're seeing today is nothing in >> comparison.
We've never had as many people on earth as we have today, and there
will be more. At least in cities the big problem is just too many
people, most of them pretty stupid.
In article <wwvfrrgrci1.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk>,
Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> writes:
On 8/6/24 6:55 AM, Stefan Ram wrote:
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote or quoted:
What happens when there are no more toolmakers?Well, if by "toolmakers" you mean those devs cranking out text
editors, search engines, or AI chatbots: We're swimming in them these
days, more than ever before in human history! So I'd say: I'll cross
that bridge when I come to it, if we ever actually run low on those
folks. (Sure, some tech fields are hurting for talent, but that's
probably not because of the new AI chatbots hitting the scene.)
I mean people who have serious work to do and know how to make a
computer do it for them. REAL experts. If there are only people who
know how to use the tools already provided for them, who will make NEW
tools?
Obviously nobody. But it’s a hypothetical situation which isn’t about to
happen.
Don't be sure. A CS professor I know told me this last week:
I'm one of the very few that teach Systems. It amazes me that
our PhD students almost all in AI have never heard of a program
counter.
Scary times. I'm glad I retire from software development in a few years.
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> writes:
On 8/9/24 1:28 PM, D wrote:
On Fri, 9 Aug 2024, The Real Bev wrote:We've never had as many people on earth as we have today, and there
On 8/7/24 12:57 AM, Richard Kettlewell wrote:In my case... short term no, long term, yes. We've survived, as a
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> writes:I'm not so sure. I look at the general dumbing down of our (and
On 8/6/24 6:55 AM, Stefan Ram wrote:Obviously nobody. But its a hypothetical situation which isnt
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote or quoted:I mean people who have serious work to do and know how to make a
What happens when there are no more toolmakers?Well, if by "toolmakers" you mean those devs cranking out text
editors, search engines, or AI chatbots: We're swimming in them these >>>>>>> days, more than ever before in human history! So I'd say: I'll cross >>>>>>> that bridge when I come to it, if we ever actually run low on those >>>>>>> folks. (Sure, some tech fields are hurting for talent, but that's >>>>>>> probably not because of the new AI chatbots hitting the scene.)
computer do it for them. REAL experts. If there are only people who >>>>>> know how to use the tools already provided for them, who will make NEW >>>>>> tools?
about to
happen.
apparently non-USA) population and wonder if there are enough
intelligent people left to make a difference. Look at the
schools. Loot at the governments. Look at the media. Is there any
reason to be optimistic?
species,
world wars, famines, pestilence. Anything we're seeing today is nothing in >>> comparison.
will be more. At least in cities the big problem is just too many
people, most of them pretty stupid.
Are you aware of current fertility rates? Check it out.
...[end quoted excerpt]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_fertility_rate
...
1950 to the present and projections
The Total Fertility Rate for six regions and the World, 1950-2100
The table[22] shows that after 1965, the demographic transition
spread around the world, and the global TFR began a long decline
that continues in the 21st century.
World historical TFR
(19502020)
Years Global Average More developed Less developed
19501955 4.86 2.84 5.94
19551960 5.01 2.75 6.15
19601965 4.70 2.71 5.64
19651970 5.08 2.51 6.23
19701975 4.83 2.32 5.87
19751980 4.08 2.01 4.88
19801985 3.75 1.89 4.40
19851990 3.52 1.82 4.03
19901995 3.31 1.78 3.71
19952000 2.88 1.58 3.18
20002005 2.73 1.57 2.98
20052010 2.62 1.61 2.81
20102015 2.59 1.69 2.74
20152020 2.52 1.67 2.66
2020-2025 2.35 1.51 2.47
The chart shows that the decline in the TFR since the 1960s has
occurred in every region of the world. The global TFR is
projected to continue declining for the remainder of the century,
and reach a below-replacement level of 1.8 by 2100.[23][24]
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 388 |
| Nodes: | 16 (3 / 13) |
| Uptime: | 06:04:49 |
| Calls: | 8,221 |
| Calls today: | 19 |
| Files: | 13,122 |
| Messages: | 5,872,262 |
| Posted today: | 1 |