Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Groups ending support for Usenet

support.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 207 posts

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#121

Post by layer8 »

Uptrenda wrote: post #59
zafiro17 wrote: post #9

The 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?

It's worth it in order to experience a more efficient discussion UI. The difficulty is in finding newgroups where actual worthwhile discussion is going on.

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#122

Post by DonHopkins »

supermatt wrote: post #112

Google has seemingly reached the pinnacle of uselessness > To find a client, do a web search for "how do I find a usenet text client" Result: https://imgur.com/a/8VrfuPu

Maybe you don't "understand what's going on in the news".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdkkTV3pIa0

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#123

Post by sieve »

BixbyUsenet wrote: post #97

I very recently have been accepted as the moderator of an abandoned, moderated group. As such, I needed to find a Usenet provider who would accept posting into moderated groups, from a moderator. I originally contacted Eternal September, and Wolfgang informed me my account had been configured to allow such posting, but it does not work ("account not authorized") and now he does not respond to email. I then contacted…

Contact Greg Lyda at UsenetExpress. You can also reach him on reddit (https://old.reddit.com/user/greglyda).

UsenetExpress is the second-biggest provider of binary news (outside of Omicron, which owns Eweka, Newshosting, UsenetServer & Tweaknews)

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#124

Post by sneak »

AdamN wrote: post #110
raverbashing wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This could have been better accomplished by multiple connections to the same port.

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#125

Post by LemmyInThePub »

theamk wrote: post #34
kazinator wrote: post #8

[flagged]

> anything goes, but in a way that works. Except it doesn't? One of the reasons usenet is dying is because without some sort of group-global moderation, everyone sees different things.. Newcomers see piles of spam, and when you don't get replies you are never sure is this something you said, or was your message silently filtered out. It's like a forum where the moderators only ever use shadow-bans. Most people would…

[dead]

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#126

Post by BirAdam »

dotancohen wrote: post #39
jart wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't matter how much money USENET makes one company, what matters is what it represents. Surrendering USENET entirely to abuse means we're losing one of the last vestiges of the ARPANET. It brings great shame and dishonor that Google won't fight for it.

> we're losing I'm certainly not losing anything. Only people who need Google services to access Usenet are losing. And I make no apology for being elitist here - some clubs are better when they are mostly frequented by the elite.

I agree that exclusivity to those most interested will provide better conversation, but I rather dislike the usage of “elite” in this context.

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#127

Post by BirAdam »

rvba wrote: post #102
jart wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 cou…

Well, Alphabet has had falling profit margins for sometime. I thought their reorg was stupid since the company’s profits all came from ads on Google’s web services. Rather than reorg, I would have just canceled the unprofitable bits.

As for sending stuff offshore, they should seriously rid themselves of this products/services instead. They need to cut costs, headcount, and company complexity. They need to focus on their core product before they die: search and ads.

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#128

Post by smittywerben »

danans wrote: post #79
Vt71fcAqt7 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

You are working really hard to gaslight a clearly Nazi thing as a non-Nazi thing. Sturmabteilung is Brownshirt is a Nazi, period.

You're still wrong. Here are 2 uses.

brown shirt (plural brown shirts)

1. Alternative form of Brownshirt

2. A worker whose role is identified by a uniform with a brown or khaki shirt.

> We really could use a brown shirt in the Park. 2007, Dana Stabenow, A Deeper Sleep, page 36

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/brown_shirt

digital brownshirt (plural digital brownshirts)

1. (slang, US, derogatory) A right-wing blogger.

> "They paid actors to make make phony video press releases and paid cash to some reporters who were willing to take it in return for positive stories. And every day they unleash squadrons of digital brownshirts to harass and hector any journalist who is critical of the President." Al Gore (October 2005), “Al Gore Addresses We Media”

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/digital_brownshirt#English

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#129

Post by nijave »

bsder wrote: post #72
zafiro17 wrote: post #9

The 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…

Is there a reason why you can't run your own Usenet server nowadays? In the old days, the issues were that bandwidth and disk were expensive. That's no longer true. Is there a techncial reason we can't have individuals running NNTP nodes?

I think you can run Leafnode if you want to host your own, small groups. Otherwise (my understanding) you need to peer with other providers and be able to consume something like 30-100TB/day if you want all groups on the network (unless you can find providers to peer with that let you limit groups)

Some discussion here https://www.reddit.com/r/usenet/comments/ziqdh2/become_my_ow...

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#130

Post by theamk »

kazinator wrote: post #75
theamk wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> anything goes, but in a way that works. Except it doesn't? One of the reasons usenet is dying is because without some sort of group-global moderation, everyone sees different things.. Newcomers see piles of spam, and when you don't get replies you are never sure is this something you said, or was your message silently filtered out. It's like a forum where the moderators only ever use shadow-bans. Most people would…

Literally every point you hit on is a Google Groups problem, not experienced by users who connect a NNTP client to server.

No, I never used usenet via google groups, this was Thunderbird + my ISP's NNTP server. Opening your favorite groups and seeing more spam than new threads was a big reason to quit.

(A second one was lack of support for multiple devices: messages read on laptop would not show up as read on desktop. Funnily enough, Google Groups solves that problem, but I could never stomach their interface)

Post reply on HN