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

161–170 of 207 posts

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#161

Post by floren »

j16sdiz wrote: post #82
bsder wrote: 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?

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

It's actually pretty trivial. Eternal-september seems happy to peer with anyone who asks (just send an email), and there's a newsgroup specifically for asking for peers; everyone who posts there gets lots of offers pretty quick.

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#162

Post by floren »

immibis wrote: post #145
ChrisClark wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Or sign up with a free text provider like eternal september?

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#163

Post by dizzydwarf »

brightsize wrote: post #62
kazinator wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why yes. I follow comp.lang.c, comp.lang.awk, comp.unix.programmer, comp.unix.shell, comp.lang.lisp. Make an account on Ray Banana's "Eternal September" server (or any one of the others), connect a client and you're good to go.

comp.lang.python is one of the busier (programming) groups as well.

GoogleGroups strips all leading whitespace.

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#165

Post by ksherlock »

dataangel wrote: post #20
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 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

One way to think usenet/newsgroups is as a set of distributed peer-to-peer mailing lists.

You post a message to your (NNTP) server. Your server connects to other peer NNTP servers to transfer messages back and forth, so eventually your message will propagate throughout the usenet network. (40 years ago peering was through UUCP, etc, and done at night when phone calls were cheaper or only to other local numbers so it might take a week, now it doesn't take that long. See also, bang paths).

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#166

Post by wolverine876 »

hedora wrote: post #159
wolverine876 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nobody gets kicked out by brownshirts for expressing their view. Who kicks out the actual brownshirts? I and most people have no interest in trolling.

Not having a centralized censorship team is a better solution than “Elon will buy it and replace the old brownshirts with new brownshirts”. (Not expressing an opinion about the content moderators that work/worked at twitter/x; just the organizational structure that led to disaster over there).

Both those solutions are failures, but they aren't at all the only options (look at HN, for example). On a certain scale, public social forums need effective moderators.

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#167

Post by Parker51 »

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…

Check out Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC ("Panix"). They run their own news server, know about moderated newsgroups, host several newsgroup moderation teams, and have reasonable rates ($100/year) for NNTP Usenet access and a Unix shell account.

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#168

Post by idiotsecant »

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.

lol 'the elite'

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#169

Post by sgammon »

danpalmer wrote: post #156
sgammon wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://github.com/firebase/firebase-ios-sdk/issues/6115 https://github.com/material-components/material-components-w... Two examples that come to mind but there are plenty

Ugh. Thanks for all your work on those issues though. It sounds like @cgrindel got somewhere with it. While I understand the frustration, I see package managers and Bazel as quite distinct approaches, and I'm not surprised that they are incompatible. There shouldn't be anything incompatible between Firebase itself and Bazel – I can assure you that Bazel is used to build wildly esoteric things at Google – but the Coco…

Bazel is not usable with Firebase as a non Googler. How is this statement incorrect?

Cocoapods and SPM has nothing to do with it. You can’t blame packaging ecosystems for Bazel’s inability to consume a dynamic iOS framework properly.

Yes, I’m aware it’s possible, as explained in that thread. The problem is that it’s only possible for people like you!

Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet

#170

Post by sgammon »

danpalmer wrote: post #156
sgammon wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://github.com/firebase/firebase-ios-sdk/issues/6115 https://github.com/material-components/material-components-w... Two examples that come to mind but there are plenty

Ugh. Thanks for all your work on those issues though. It sounds like @cgrindel got somewhere with it. While I understand the frustration, I see package managers and Bazel as quite distinct approaches, and I'm not surprised that they are incompatible. There shouldn't be anything incompatible between Firebase itself and Bazel – I can assure you that Bazel is used to build wildly esoteric things at Google – but the Coco…

And no problem / you’re welcome, thanks for the thank you, but this problem is so bad that we left Google.

So while I appreciate the thank you, as a user, id appreciate a fix a lot more.

Post reply on HN