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

131–140 of 207 posts

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#131

Post by pbronez »

dredmorbius wrote: post #88
j16sdiz wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Guess it's hard to get others sync with you?

The principle use-case for Usenet has always been small, controlled-access networks. That's what ARPANET and the early Internet were, where "small" meant The Matrix (1990): https://archive.org/details/matrixcomputerne0000quar/page/24... > Spinning up an NNTP group for internal company communications, for a family group, or for a (sufficently tech-savvy) organisation or hobby group would be a viable option. My experie…

Hmm and if you limit the use case to those small groups, there are a lot more options now. There's the whole Fediverse stack, of course, but also lots of stand alone forum options you can self host. And why self host when there are also lots of low-cost community platform options out there?

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#132

Post by jghn »

blihp wrote: post #45
dataangel wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a broader tutorial for this, newsgroups mostly missed me, I don't really grok how they fit into the greater internet or how their hosting works or why you have to pay a separate provider

In the dark ages when internet access was limited and/or via dialup for most of us, there were several tools and protocols to work with what we had: email, ftp and usenet were some of the main ones. Usenet was basically a primordial set of distributed forums platform (and quasi-social network) where copies of the data were stored locally. It was how a lot of information got disseminated prior to the mid-90's when the…

IMO an analogy to modern times would be a federated Reddit. I'd liken it to Lemmy but don't have enough experience with it to be sure it doesn't ruin my analogy in some way :)

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#133

Post by jghn »

Fatnino wrote: post #118
blihp wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the dark ages when internet access was limited and/or via dialup for most of us, there were several tools and protocols to work with what we had: email, ftp and usenet were some of the main ones. Usenet was basically a primordial set of distributed forums platform (and quasi-social network) where copies of the data were stored locally. It was how a lot of information got disseminated prior to the mid-90's when the…

Also where the (outdated) idea that "the internet never forgets anything" came from.

There was a period of time where the notion that everything would be archived was unfathomable to the average user. Sure, in theory it could be. But storage was expensive and the value of storing that stuff was low.

Unfortunately, when DejaNews came out it became clear that at least one person out there recorded everything. Many an embarrassing post of mine was unearthed. When one has tens of thousands of posts and is young & stupid, that was bound to happen. Of course now all these years later I can barely find any of my posts on the internet, embarrassing or otherwise.

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#134

Post by sumtechguy »

LanzVonL wrote: post #69
1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #67

Wish there was some way to give the data Google obtained in the Deja News acquisition back to the public, i.e., allow free public access to all of it as Deja News was doing at the time. (After the acqusitition, for a while Javascript was required to access comp.unix.* groups via Google Groups. Eventually, after years went by, this was fixed. But even then some of the data from these groups and other computing related…

Archive.org has it all. It's not in a usable format, it's like tar dumps. But it's on there.

This is something archive really should put some resources towards. Its discoverability of items is really poor. Going thru archive to find things is like going to that one consignment shop where the owner bought all of the businesses around him going out of business for the past 30 years and he tossed it all in a warehouse. You know it is in there but finding anything is terrible.

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#136

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

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…

You can always use the trick used to post into moderated alt.hackers. You don't need a server to manage approvals of your own postings.

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#137

Post by ajsnigrutin »

layer8 wrote: post #121
Uptrenda wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The problem with ham radio is, that most people are not that interested in the tech itself. In the past, even if you didn't care about tech, you could still buy some radio kit and join the hobby for the "chatting" part. Now, you can get 'chat' everywhere, a lot easier and cheaper to set up, and you also gain privacy (encryption, no real-world indentifiers etc.), although I prefer the "open forum" type of ham radio communication, because well... it's meant to be open.

It's same with usenet... you can get the "chat"/discusson part everywhere now (reddit,...), usually with a bit better UI and it doesn't really offer much more than that. Back in the time, it was the best (and well.. the only) thing to have.. now with alternatives, people move elsewhere, and unless you find a niche you're interested in and a community exists on usenet, you won't have much to do there.

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#138

Post by ajsnigrutin »

sneak wrote: post #124
AdamN wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

A lot harder to implement QoS on that.

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#139

Post by thfuran »

jart wrote: post #29
thfuran wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much money is Google making from Usenet support?

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.

>It doesn't matter how much money USENET makes one company

I think it matters a lot to that company and, in particular, to the question of why they might not be willing to put much effort into USENET support.

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#140

Post by dark-star »

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.

it also allowed for FXP, which was a godsend in early pirating/warez days ;-)

...or so I've heard

Post reply on HN