Embrace, Extend, Extinguish.
Google Groups ending support for Usenet
101–110 of 207 posts
Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet
#102Part of the background for this is that over the past month or more, Usenet has been under an unprecedented spam attack from Google Groups that Google isn't doing anything about. People have resorted to filtering everything coming from Google Groups, with a white list, and there are voices calling for de-peering of Google Groups from the Usenet federation.
Sounds like the barbarians are sacking Rome. What happened to mighty Google's thirst for blood and will to dominate the Internet? It feels like they've just started accepting being helpless to stop all this spam.
Google has now an CEO who is outsourcing everything to cut costs.
Google already had a quality problems before due to culture of zero support and dropping projects after their managers' got promoted, but now they have a problem with keeping up to any standards.
That's how it works when you offshore everything - where the main criteria is price and nobody cares about quality at all. They could offshore to mid cost countries, but they offshore to cheapest bidders.
Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet
#103The nightmare is over? I've used Usenet for years. Most serious users filter out any post originating from G2 to do away with Google posts. It's been a huge source of spam and annoyance. Usenet gets better as it gets smaller, honestly. Most groups are carcasses these days, but several have regular use. comp.misc, misc.news.internet.discuss, and sci.misc are active. Several groups in the comp* hierarchy are active. Th…
You think it's worth getting into Usenet for new people?
Its worth it in the same way that HAM radio is / is not worth it. You do it as a sort of lifestyle choice.
Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet
#104me: sundar i want firebase to work with bazel
sundar: we are working on an amazing new ai
sundar later:
Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet
#105me: sundar i want firebase to work with bazel sundar: we are working on an amazing new ai sundar later:
What doesn't work between Firebase and Bazel, out of interest? Bazel seems to be super generic?
Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet
#106Can Google just fucking kill this? Literally all my recruiter spam is coming from groups. Even when I worked at Google internally I raised a ticket with full info of what’s going on and they still haven’t fixed it. (Yes I have the “can’t add me to groups” button on).
Internal Google tickets have If you know anyone still there, just have a peek at all the internally opened tickets about bricked Android phones. Their processes are...messy.
A random ticket thrown into the abyss might not get any traction, but I find a well considered ticket with appropriate instructions typically results in help. Sometimes it takes a quick ping on chat or finding the right person, but people are generally helpful in routing bugs.
I'm regularly pleasantly surprised when I file a bug for something on the other side of the company and get proper engagement on it.
Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet
#107Most importantly, > You can continue to view and search for historical Usenet content posted before February 22, 2024 on Google Groups.
> You can continue to view and search for historical Usenet content posted before February 22, 2024 on Google Groups.
What about the newsgroups where access (including the archives!) had been blocked by Google for too much spam (maybe ironically facilitated by Google Groups in the first place)?
Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
> your isp probably won't let you host services but that's been the case for decades How would your ISP know? NNTP originally was originally store-and-forward over dialup like links, no? So, if I contact a different server and upload/download the changed data, how would they even know? I guess the big issue would be having some "rendezvous" server in order to help with NAT punching as well as authentication.
The protocol is from the era where each protocol used a dedicated TCP port rather than "it's all JSON over HTTPS" like now.
Yeah. Amen to that
There were some bad ideas in the beginning, FTP as an example of several of those
Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, the definition of Brownshirt is pretty unambiguous: https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/the-sa There isn't an alternative grammatical parsing that changes that.
I hope you realize that you have given a link to an encyclopedia to show the definition of a word. The fifth edition of the American Heritage Dictionary, published in 2011, already gave a second definition of brownshirt: >A racist, especially a violent, right-wing one.[0] Oxford Dictionary has an even broader definition[1] As noted by other users, "brownshirt" is also used to describe "anyone in authority."[2] I actu…
Using “brownshirt” for anyone in authority is clearly missing the point entirely. There is a reason the brownshirts were eliminated after the nazis came to power. They were violent gangs of nazi thugs operating outside the law to terrorize opponents. When the nazi party came to power they were not useful or necessary anymore, since now the party could just change the law and perform terror through official institutions.
Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
The protocol is from the era where each protocol used a dedicated TCP port rather than "it's all JSON over HTTPS" like now.
Yeah. Amen to that There were some bad ideas in the beginning, FTP as an example of several of those
FTP splitting the data and control ports was a smart implementation. It allowed for optimization of the ports (one focused on throughput) and meant that control could still occur even while long responses were happening on the data port.