Live data from Hacker News

Google Groups ending support for Usenet

support.google.com

141–150 of 207 posts

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#141

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

And here is DDG

https://imgur.com/gallery/i9OU844

I've had so many people tell me that DDG is inferior to Google Search, but that has not been my experience, at all.

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#142

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

Tbf thats how its supposed to work. By quoting it you are explicitly searching for the text "how do I find a usenet text client". Remove the quotes.

That's an awkward PEBCAK error.

Happens to all of us.

Bet whoever wrote that instruction never expected this.

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#143
post #129
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

Note that 30-100TB/day is mostly copies of pirated copies of movies, getting re-encrypted each time so you have to pay someone to get the encryption key and to avoid detection.

If you want text groups, it must be a lot lower.

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#144
post #110

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.

I haven't tested it, but I imagine it allows you to trick an FTP server into making an HTTP request (without TLS).

It probably seemed like a good idea at the time, and there was no way to know the problems without trying it.

It also allows you to send a command to cancel an ongoing transfer.

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#145
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.

Why are we losing it? It's only Google Groups that will stop posting to Usenet. Most spam was coming from there anyway. If you want to use Usenet, just get a news reader, don't go through Google.

Just get a news reader and pay money for a usenet provider. (They cost money because 99.99% of usenet traffic is pirated movies and providers know that and optimize for that bandwidth-heavy use case)

And hope the provider actually carries text groups and not only pirate movie groups.

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If it's available for public download, then someone else can do it if they have the demand. I wouldn't ask archive.org to tie up their resources when they're already struggling with lawsuits.

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#147

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…

AFAIK all the major usenet providers except for EternalSeptember (which is for discussion) are just download sites for pirated movies. That's why they don't know about moderated groups, and why they have the price structure they do.

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#149
post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think it's worth getting into Usenet for new people?

Gopher is the next big thing.

I literally write a briefing paper advising my university to clamp down on the nascent web and continue with gopher which was much more systematic and organized.

Clearly they ignored me as they should.

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#150
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?

Properly threaded, low-bandwidth, decent signal:noise ratio, text-only discussion? Sounds good to me. Far too little of that around.
Post reply on HN