Must I use a horse whip?
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
On Thu, 27 Mar 2025 19:49:29 +0000, Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote in
<pan$790a1$48e9af87$bea83f88$c410c059@linux.rocks>:
Must I use a horse whip?
I did not know that you identified as a horse.
Good to know.
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
On Thu, 27 Mar 2025 19:49:29 +0000, Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote in <pan$790a1$48e9af87$bea83f88$c410c059@linux.rocks>:
Must I use a horse whip?
I did not know that you identified as a horse.
Good to know.
How can we improve this group?
First, get rid of that nonentity "Joel." This idiot
is a total, unequivocal ZERO.
Second, get rid of that "Crude Sausage." This loser,
amazingly, is both a "boorish bore" and a "boring boor."
Whew! What a degenerate!
Third, promote C.O.L.A. on "social media" to attract more
knowledgeable and enthusiatic people.
Get going!
Must I use a horse whip?
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
Well, if you COULD get more people to migrate to USENET from traditional social media, that would be great. I personally don't think many people
are going to want to learn a new software for such an old protocol.
On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 19:00:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
Well, if you COULD get more people to migrate to USENET from traditional
social media, that would be great. I personally don't think many people
are going to want to learn a new software for such an old protocol.
Well, then, maybe they should stop using email. After all, that protocol goes back to at least 1975.
I am sick of these assholes who denigrate a medium simply because
it's origin goes back a few decades.
Communication protocols don't have "best buy" dates. They are
valid forever.
I am reminded of the Micro$oft strategy that tried to discredit
Linux because it was based upon Unix which is an "ancient" OS.
Fuck Micro$soft and fuck YOU.
Usenet is still very much viable as is IRC. All that is required
is for more people to start using it -- again.
The case is closed.
Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote at 20:55 this Wednesday (GMT):
On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 19:00:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
Well, if you COULD get more people to migrate to USENET from traditional >>> social media, that would be great. I personally don't think many people
are going to want to learn a new software for such an old protocol.
Well, then, maybe they should stop using email. After all, that protocol
goes back to at least 1975.
Most people use a website for email, and Gmail/Outlook.
Usenet is still very much viable as is IRC. All that is required
is for more people to start using it -- again.
The case is closed.
I agree, the main problem from my pov is barrier to entry and
"precivable" benefits. Yes, obviously, USENET is great for being simple
and decrentralized, but the average person would not care/understand
what being "decentralized" means, and the simplicity is seen as a
drawback. And as for barrier to entry, the only real client people would
be likely/willing to use would be Thunderbird, since everything else is either old (again, /I/ don't care, but ppl definitely would), highly specialized FOSS programs that most of the time are targeted to Linux,
or a TUI program. And they have to configure the newsreader to connect
to a server, FIND a server, etc etc.. and no layman would go through
that just for a "retro forum experience that has barely any users". As
well as the general tech illiteracy. So, IF the barrier to entry was
lowered, and potentially a webapp made, people MIGHT be willing to try
it. I think that's a pretty long shot, though.
Well, then, maybe they should stop using email. After all, that protocol
goes back to at least 1975.
Most people use a website for email, and Gmail/Outlook.
On 4/9/25 19:40, candycanearter07 wrote:
Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote at 20:55 this Wednesday (GMT):
On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 19:00:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
Well, if you COULD get more people to migrate to USENET from traditional >>>> social media, that would be great. I personally don't think many people >>>> are going to want to learn a new software for such an old protocol.
Well, then, maybe they should stop using email. After all, that protocol >>> goes back to at least 1975.
Most people use a website for email, and Gmail/Outlook.
I see nothing but security issues in using web-based e-mail myself. If
my e-mail is not configured in a client like Betterbird, I also find it incredibly inconvenient.
< snip >
Usenet is still very much viable as is IRC. All that is required
is for more people to start using it -- again.
The case is closed.
I agree, the main problem from my pov is barrier to entry and
"precivable" benefits. Yes, obviously, USENET is great for being simple
and decrentralized, but the average person would not care/understand
what being "decentralized" means, and the simplicity is seen as a
drawback. And as for barrier to entry, the only real client people would
be likely/willing to use would be Thunderbird, since everything else is
either old (again, /I/ don't care, but ppl definitely would), highly
specialized FOSS programs that most of the time are targeted to Linux,
or a TUI program. And they have to configure the newsreader to connect
to a server, FIND a server, etc etc.. and no layman would go through
that just for a "retro forum experience that has barely any users". As
well as the general tech illiteracy. So, IF the barrier to entry was
lowered, and potentially a webapp made, people MIGHT be willing to try
it. I think that's a pretty long shot, though.
Good luck getting people to use IRC again. I spent my adolescence on
there, but it is clear that it is not attracting the same kind of people three decades later. It's too bad because some networks, like Rizon, are doing a fantastic job with their servers. Nonetheless, IRC apparently
isn't as appealing in its uncensored, decentralized nature as a
proprietary, centralized social medium like Instagram's comment section is.
To be honest, I'm glad that neither IRC nor Usenet attract those kinds
of people anyway. I'd rather know that I'm communicating with
sufficiently smart individuals on the old networks than the vapid, superficial cretins on modern social media.
On Wed, 09 Apr 2025 23:40:03 +0000, candycanearter07 wrote:
Well, then, maybe they should stop using email. After all, that protocol >>> goes back to at least 1975.
Most people use a website for email, and Gmail/Outlook.
Most BRAIN-DEAD IDIOTS use a wesite for email, and Gmail/Outlook.
FTFY.
I cannot image the kind of supremely doltish moron that would actually
use web mail. It is extremely sluggish, awkward, and frustrating. One
has to actually log in with 2-factor authentication. Then Gmail, with
its nanny algorithms, keeps shoving messages of advice and warning into
ones face. Futhermore the whole interface looks like shit. It is a
totally irritating mess!.
Give me wonderful Sylpheed, the absolute best email client anywhere.
It is built on GTK+2 (not +3) and it is quick, slick, and a supreme joy
to use. Nothing could ever be better.
https://sylpheed.sraoss.jp/en/
On 2025-04-10, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 4/9/25 19:40, candycanearter07 wrote:
Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote at 20:55 this Wednesday (GMT):
On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 19:00:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
Well, if you COULD get more people to migrate to USENET from traditional >>>>> social media, that would be great. I personally don't think many people >>>>> are going to want to learn a new software for such an old protocol.
Well, then, maybe they should stop using email. After all, that protocol >>>> goes back to at least 1975.
Most people use a website for email, and Gmail/Outlook.
I see nothing but security issues in using web-based e-mail myself. If
my e-mail is not configured in a client like Betterbird, I also find it
incredibly inconvenient.
< snip >
Usenet is still very much viable as is IRC. All that is required
is for more people to start using it -- again.
The case is closed.
I agree, the main problem from my pov is barrier to entry and
"precivable" benefits. Yes, obviously, USENET is great for being simple
and decrentralized, but the average person would not care/understand
what being "decentralized" means, and the simplicity is seen as a
drawback. And as for barrier to entry, the only real client people would >>> be likely/willing to use would be Thunderbird, since everything else is
either old (again, /I/ don't care, but ppl definitely would), highly
specialized FOSS programs that most of the time are targeted to Linux,
or a TUI program. And they have to configure the newsreader to connect
to a server, FIND a server, etc etc.. and no layman would go through
that just for a "retro forum experience that has barely any users". As
well as the general tech illiteracy. So, IF the barrier to entry was
lowered, and potentially a webapp made, people MIGHT be willing to try
it. I think that's a pretty long shot, though.
Good luck getting people to use IRC again. I spent my adolescence on
there, but it is clear that it is not attracting the same kind of people
three decades later. It's too bad because some networks, like Rizon, are
doing a fantastic job with their servers. Nonetheless, IRC apparently
isn't as appealing in its uncensored, decentralized nature as a
proprietary, centralized social medium like Instagram's comment section is. >>
To be honest, I'm glad that neither IRC nor Usenet attract those kinds
of people anyway. I'd rather know that I'm communicating with
sufficiently smart individuals on the old networks than the vapid,
superficial cretins on modern social media.
IRC doesn't have stickers, animated emojis, GIFs. You cannot review
messages that came through when you were offline. Almost now changing
of fonts. No avatars. It takes a bit to learn (depending on the
client). No advertising, no extra "features" such as NFTs and skins or
what have you. No reactions and no branding (ie, logos for chat groups).
I'm saying this not because I agree, but because this is what people
want. I do prefer the simplicity of IRC myself, bit IRC is not coming
back. There are no good mobile clients...
On 2025-04-10 08:58, Borax Man wrote:
On 2025-04-10, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 4/9/25 19:40, candycanearter07 wrote:
Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote at 20:55 this Wednesday (GMT):
On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 19:00:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
Well, if you COULD get more people to migrate to USENET from traditional >>>>>> social media, that would be great. I personally don't think many people >>>>>> are going to want to learn a new software for such an old protocol. >>>>>>
Well, then, maybe they should stop using email. After all, that protocol >>>>> goes back to at least 1975.
Most people use a website for email, and Gmail/Outlook.
I see nothing but security issues in using web-based e-mail myself. If
my e-mail is not configured in a client like Betterbird, I also find it
incredibly inconvenient.
< snip >
Usenet is still very much viable as is IRC. All that is required
is for more people to start using it -- again.
The case is closed.
I agree, the main problem from my pov is barrier to entry and
"precivable" benefits. Yes, obviously, USENET is great for being simple >>>> and decrentralized, but the average person would not care/understand
what being "decentralized" means, and the simplicity is seen as a
drawback. And as for barrier to entry, the only real client people would >>>> be likely/willing to use would be Thunderbird, since everything else is >>>> either old (again, /I/ don't care, but ppl definitely would), highly
specialized FOSS programs that most of the time are targeted to Linux, >>>> or a TUI program. And they have to configure the newsreader to connect >>>> to a server, FIND a server, etc etc.. and no layman would go through
that just for a "retro forum experience that has barely any users". As >>>> well as the general tech illiteracy. So, IF the barrier to entry was
lowered, and potentially a webapp made, people MIGHT be willing to try >>>> it. I think that's a pretty long shot, though.
Good luck getting people to use IRC again. I spent my adolescence on
there, but it is clear that it is not attracting the same kind of people >>> three decades later. It's too bad because some networks, like Rizon, are >>> doing a fantastic job with their servers. Nonetheless, IRC apparently
isn't as appealing in its uncensored, decentralized nature as a
proprietary, centralized social medium like Instagram's comment section is. >>>
To be honest, I'm glad that neither IRC nor Usenet attract those kinds
of people anyway. I'd rather know that I'm communicating with
sufficiently smart individuals on the old networks than the vapid,
superficial cretins on modern social media.
IRC doesn't have stickers, animated emojis, GIFs. You cannot review
messages that came through when you were offline. Almost now changing
of fonts. No avatars. It takes a bit to learn (depending on the
client). No advertising, no extra "features" such as NFTs and skins or
what have you. No reactions and no branding (ie, logos for chat groups).
I'm saying this not because I agree, but because this is what people
want. I do prefer the simplicity of IRC myself, bit IRC is not coming
back. There are no good mobile clients...
Who the heck would want to use IRC on a cell phone anyway? It's made to
be used with a keyboard. Anyways, if people want to get off of it in
favour of something like Discord, all the power to them. However, I
wouldn't want these people to complain once they're faced with a
bombardment of advertisements and mass censorship.
On 2025-04-10, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2025-04-10 08:58, Borax Man wrote:
On 2025-04-10, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 4/9/25 19:40, candycanearter07 wrote:
Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote at 20:55 this Wednesday (GMT):
On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 19:00:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
Well, if you COULD get more people to migrate to USENET from traditional
social media, that would be great. I personally don't think many people >>>>>>> are going to want to learn a new software for such an old protocol. >>>>>>>
Well, then, maybe they should stop using email. After all, that protocol
goes back to at least 1975.
Most people use a website for email, and Gmail/Outlook.
I see nothing but security issues in using web-based e-mail myself. If >>>> my e-mail is not configured in a client like Betterbird, I also find it >>>> incredibly inconvenient.
< snip >
Usenet is still very much viable as is IRC. All that is required
is for more people to start using it -- again.
The case is closed.
I agree, the main problem from my pov is barrier to entry and
"precivable" benefits. Yes, obviously, USENET is great for being simple >>>>> and decrentralized, but the average person would not care/understand >>>>> what being "decentralized" means, and the simplicity is seen as a
drawback. And as for barrier to entry, the only real client people would >>>>> be likely/willing to use would be Thunderbird, since everything else is >>>>> either old (again, /I/ don't care, but ppl definitely would), highly >>>>> specialized FOSS programs that most of the time are targeted to Linux, >>>>> or a TUI program. And they have to configure the newsreader to connect >>>>> to a server, FIND a server, etc etc.. and no layman would go through >>>>> that just for a "retro forum experience that has barely any users". As >>>>> well as the general tech illiteracy. So, IF the barrier to entry was >>>>> lowered, and potentially a webapp made, people MIGHT be willing to try >>>>> it. I think that's a pretty long shot, though.
Good luck getting people to use IRC again. I spent my adolescence on
there, but it is clear that it is not attracting the same kind of people >>>> three decades later. It's too bad because some networks, like Rizon, are >>>> doing a fantastic job with their servers. Nonetheless, IRC apparently
isn't as appealing in its uncensored, decentralized nature as a
proprietary, centralized social medium like Instagram's comment section is.
To be honest, I'm glad that neither IRC nor Usenet attract those kinds >>>> of people anyway. I'd rather know that I'm communicating with
sufficiently smart individuals on the old networks than the vapid,
superficial cretins on modern social media.
IRC doesn't have stickers, animated emojis, GIFs. You cannot review
messages that came through when you were offline. Almost now changing
of fonts. No avatars. It takes a bit to learn (depending on the
client). No advertising, no extra "features" such as NFTs and skins or
what have you. No reactions and no branding (ie, logos for chat groups). >>>
I'm saying this not because I agree, but because this is what people
want. I do prefer the simplicity of IRC myself, bit IRC is not coming
back. There are no good mobile clients...
Who the heck would want to use IRC on a cell phone anyway? It's made to
be used with a keyboard. Anyways, if people want to get off of it in
favour of something like Discord, all the power to them. However, I
wouldn't want these people to complain once they're faced with a
bombardment of advertisements and mass censorship.
+1 and the worse part of Discord is closed source, they mine your data,
they sell your data, you need a phone number to subscribe in many cases
and the list goes on and on ... see any privacy forum and you will see.
there are other options:
- Revolt.chat Is open source self hosted or you can use the developers
official host, is a discord clone with out the privacy issues.
- Matrix Spaces (not matrix but Matrix Spaces) the best with e2ee
encryption, voice/video chat(in beta the old one is not that great)
- of course good old IRC.
Happy Hacking
ReK2
+1 and the worse part of Discord is closed source, they mine your data,
they sell your data, you need a phone number to subscribe in many cases
and the list goes on and on ... see any privacy forum and you will see.
there are other options:
- Revolt.chat Is open source self hosted or you can use the developers
official host, is a discord clone with out the privacy issues.
- Matrix Spaces (not matrix but Matrix Spaces) the best with e2ee
encryption, voice/video chat(in beta the old one is not that great)
- of course good old IRC.
Happy Hacking
ReK2
Thanks for the recommendations, and I might go back to chatting one day. However, my desire to talk to people live has died. I much prefer forums
like this one.
rek2 hispagatos <rek2@hispagatos.meow.org.invalid> wrote:
+1 and the worse part of Discord is closed source, they mine your data, >>they sell your data, you need a phone number to subscribe in many cases
and the list goes on and on ... see any privacy forum and you will see. >>there are other options:
- Revolt.chat Is open source self hosted or you can use the developers
official host, is a discord clone with out the privacy issues.
- Matrix Spaces (not matrix but Matrix Spaces) the best with e2ee
encryption, voice/video chat(in beta the old one is not that great)
- of course good old IRC.
Happy Hacking
ReK2
You are clearly living in the underground Internet, I live above
ground, with Linux as if it was Winblows, better than the real thing.
It's fun.
On 4/9/25 19:40, candycanearter07 wrote:
Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote at 20:55 this Wednesday (GMT):
On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 19:00:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
Well, if you COULD get more people to migrate to USENET from traditional >>>> social media, that would be great. I personally don't think many people >>>> are going to want to learn a new software for such an old protocol.
Well, then, maybe they should stop using email. After all, that protocol >>> goes back to at least 1975.
Most people use a website for email, and Gmail/Outlook.
I see nothing but security issues in using web-based e-mail myself. If
my e-mail is not configured in a client like Betterbird, I also find it incredibly inconvenient.
< snip >
Usenet is still very much viable as is IRC. All that is required
is for more people to start using it -- again.
The case is closed.
I agree, the main problem from my pov is barrier to entry and
"precivable" benefits. Yes, obviously, USENET is great for being simple
and decrentralized, but the average person would not care/understand
what being "decentralized" means, and the simplicity is seen as a
drawback. And as for barrier to entry, the only real client people would
be likely/willing to use would be Thunderbird, since everything else is
either old (again, /I/ don't care, but ppl definitely would), highly
specialized FOSS programs that most of the time are targeted to Linux,
or a TUI program. And they have to configure the newsreader to connect
to a server, FIND a server, etc etc.. and no layman would go through
that just for a "retro forum experience that has barely any users". As
well as the general tech illiteracy. So, IF the barrier to entry was
lowered, and potentially a webapp made, people MIGHT be willing to try
it. I think that's a pretty long shot, though.
Good luck getting people to use IRC again. I spent my adolescence on
there, but it is clear that it is not attracting the same kind of people three decades later. It's too bad because some networks, like Rizon, are doing a fantastic job with their servers. Nonetheless, IRC apparently
isn't as appealing in its uncensored, decentralized nature as a
proprietary, centralized social medium like Instagram's comment section is.
To be honest, I'm glad that neither IRC nor Usenet attract those kinds
of people anyway. I'd rather know that I'm communicating with
sufficiently smart individuals on the old networks than the vapid, superficial cretins on modern social media.
I use Claws-Mail, which was from a fork of Sylpheed. I chose Claws-Mail
for its usable GPG intergration.
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 13:03:21 -0000 (UTC), Borax Man wrote:
I use Claws-Mail, which was from a fork of Sylpheed. I chose Claws-Mail
for its usable GPG intergration.
Sylpheed has complete GPG integration without a plugin.
Have you tried the current 3.7.1 version?
Note:
Sylpheed has released a 3.8.0 beta that has OAuth2 which
will allow reading/writing to Gmail servers. Reportedly
it does not work too well -- but who in their right mind
would ever want to read/write from Gmail?
On 2025-04-10 08:58, Borax Man wrote:
On 2025-04-10, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 4/9/25 19:40, candycanearter07 wrote:
Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote at 20:55 this Wednesday (GMT):
On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 19:00:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
Well, if you COULD get more people to migrate to USENET from traditional >>>>>> social media, that would be great. I personally don't think many people >>>>>> are going to want to learn a new software for such an old protocol. >>>>>>
Well, then, maybe they should stop using email. After all, that protocol >>>>> goes back to at least 1975.
Most people use a website for email, and Gmail/Outlook.
I see nothing but security issues in using web-based e-mail myself. If
my e-mail is not configured in a client like Betterbird, I also find it
incredibly inconvenient.
< snip >
Usenet is still very much viable as is IRC. All that is required
is for more people to start using it -- again.
The case is closed.
I agree, the main problem from my pov is barrier to entry and
"precivable" benefits. Yes, obviously, USENET is great for being simple >>>> and decrentralized, but the average person would not care/understand
what being "decentralized" means, and the simplicity is seen as a
drawback. And as for barrier to entry, the only real client people would >>>> be likely/willing to use would be Thunderbird, since everything else is >>>> either old (again, /I/ don't care, but ppl definitely would), highly
specialized FOSS programs that most of the time are targeted to Linux, >>>> or a TUI program. And they have to configure the newsreader to connect >>>> to a server, FIND a server, etc etc.. and no layman would go through
that just for a "retro forum experience that has barely any users". As >>>> well as the general tech illiteracy. So, IF the barrier to entry was
lowered, and potentially a webapp made, people MIGHT be willing to try >>>> it. I think that's a pretty long shot, though.
Good luck getting people to use IRC again. I spent my adolescence on
there, but it is clear that it is not attracting the same kind of people >>> three decades later. It's too bad because some networks, like Rizon, are >>> doing a fantastic job with their servers. Nonetheless, IRC apparently
isn't as appealing in its uncensored, decentralized nature as a
proprietary, centralized social medium like Instagram's comment section is. >>>
To be honest, I'm glad that neither IRC nor Usenet attract those kinds
of people anyway. I'd rather know that I'm communicating with
sufficiently smart individuals on the old networks than the vapid,
superficial cretins on modern social media.
IRC doesn't have stickers, animated emojis, GIFs. You cannot review
messages that came through when you were offline. Almost now changing
of fonts. No avatars. It takes a bit to learn (depending on the
client). No advertising, no extra "features" such as NFTs and skins or
what have you. No reactions and no branding (ie, logos for chat groups).
I'm saying this not because I agree, but because this is what people
want. I do prefer the simplicity of IRC myself, bit IRC is not coming
back. There are no good mobile clients...
Who the heck would want to use IRC on a cell phone anyway? It's made to
be used with a keyboard. Anyways, if people want to get off of it in
favour of something like Discord, all the power to them. However, I
wouldn't want these people to complain once they're faced with a
bombardment of advertisements and mass censorship.
CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote at 00:02 this Thursday (GMT):
On 4/9/25 19:40, candycanearter07 wrote:
Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote at 20:55 this Wednesday (GMT):
On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 19:00:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
Well, if you COULD get more people to migrate to USENET from traditional >>>>> social media, that would be great. I personally don't think many people >>>>> are going to want to learn a new software for such an old protocol.
Well, then, maybe they should stop using email. After all, that protocol >>>> goes back to at least 1975.
Most people use a website for email, and Gmail/Outlook.
I see nothing but security issues in using web-based e-mail myself. If
my e-mail is not configured in a client like Betterbird, I also find it
incredibly inconvenient.
I mostly use a website for my outlook account, since the org setup makes
it extremely hard to use betterbird for it.
< snip >
Usenet is still very much viable as is IRC. All that is required
is for more people to start using it -- again.
The case is closed.
I agree, the main problem from my pov is barrier to entry and
"precivable" benefits. Yes, obviously, USENET is great for being simple
and decrentralized, but the average person would not care/understand
what being "decentralized" means, and the simplicity is seen as a
drawback. And as for barrier to entry, the only real client people would >>> be likely/willing to use would be Thunderbird, since everything else is
either old (again, /I/ don't care, but ppl definitely would), highly
specialized FOSS programs that most of the time are targeted to Linux,
or a TUI program. And they have to configure the newsreader to connect
to a server, FIND a server, etc etc.. and no layman would go through
that just for a "retro forum experience that has barely any users". As
well as the general tech illiteracy. So, IF the barrier to entry was
lowered, and potentially a webapp made, people MIGHT be willing to try
it. I think that's a pretty long shot, though.
Good luck getting people to use IRC again. I spent my adolescence on
there, but it is clear that it is not attracting the same kind of people
three decades later. It's too bad because some networks, like Rizon, are
doing a fantastic job with their servers. Nonetheless, IRC apparently
isn't as appealing in its uncensored, decentralized nature as a
proprietary, centralized social medium like Instagram's comment section is.
What's Rizon doing?
On 2025-04-10, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2025-04-10 08:58, Borax Man wrote:
On 2025-04-10, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 4/9/25 19:40, candycanearter07 wrote:
Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote at 20:55 this Wednesday (GMT):
On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 19:00:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
Well, if you COULD get more people to migrate to USENET from traditional
social media, that would be great. I personally don't think many people >>>>>>> are going to want to learn a new software for such an old protocol. >>>>>>>
Well, then, maybe they should stop using email. After all, that protocol
goes back to at least 1975.
Most people use a website for email, and Gmail/Outlook.
I see nothing but security issues in using web-based e-mail myself. If >>>> my e-mail is not configured in a client like Betterbird, I also find it >>>> incredibly inconvenient.
< snip >
Usenet is still very much viable as is IRC. All that is required
is for more people to start using it -- again.
The case is closed.
I agree, the main problem from my pov is barrier to entry and
"precivable" benefits. Yes, obviously, USENET is great for being simple >>>>> and decrentralized, but the average person would not care/understand >>>>> what being "decentralized" means, and the simplicity is seen as a
drawback. And as for barrier to entry, the only real client people would >>>>> be likely/willing to use would be Thunderbird, since everything else is >>>>> either old (again, /I/ don't care, but ppl definitely would), highly >>>>> specialized FOSS programs that most of the time are targeted to Linux, >>>>> or a TUI program. And they have to configure the newsreader to connect >>>>> to a server, FIND a server, etc etc.. and no layman would go through >>>>> that just for a "retro forum experience that has barely any users". As >>>>> well as the general tech illiteracy. So, IF the barrier to entry was >>>>> lowered, and potentially a webapp made, people MIGHT be willing to try >>>>> it. I think that's a pretty long shot, though.
Good luck getting people to use IRC again. I spent my adolescence on
there, but it is clear that it is not attracting the same kind of people >>>> three decades later. It's too bad because some networks, like Rizon, are >>>> doing a fantastic job with their servers. Nonetheless, IRC apparently
isn't as appealing in its uncensored, decentralized nature as a
proprietary, centralized social medium like Instagram's comment section is.
To be honest, I'm glad that neither IRC nor Usenet attract those kinds >>>> of people anyway. I'd rather know that I'm communicating with
sufficiently smart individuals on the old networks than the vapid,
superficial cretins on modern social media.
IRC doesn't have stickers, animated emojis, GIFs. You cannot review
messages that came through when you were offline. Almost now changing
of fonts. No avatars. It takes a bit to learn (depending on the
client). No advertising, no extra "features" such as NFTs and skins or
what have you. No reactions and no branding (ie, logos for chat groups). >>>
I'm saying this not because I agree, but because this is what people
want. I do prefer the simplicity of IRC myself, bit IRC is not coming
back. There are no good mobile clients...
Who the heck would want to use IRC on a cell phone anyway? It's made to
be used with a keyboard. Anyways, if people want to get off of it in
favour of something like Discord, all the power to them. However, I
wouldn't want these people to complain once they're faced with a
bombardment of advertisements and mass censorship.
People use their phones a lot for chat. Some chat places I hang out on,
I'd say MOST are on their phone. Someone younger asked me how I
responded with lng replies so quickly, and I said I was using my laptop.
They thought I was *WEIRD*! It wasn't IRC, but still, the point is
people just pull out their phones and use that, rather than a keyboard.
The phone is "just there". I think its a devolution, a backwards step
in communication, but thats what is happening.
On 2025-04-11 03:10, Borax Man wrote:
On 2025-04-10, Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 13:03:21 -0000 (UTC), Borax Man wrote:
I use Claws-Mail, which was from a fork of Sylpheed. I chose Claws-Mail >>>> for its usable GPG intergration.
Sylpheed has complete GPG integration without a plugin.
Have you tried the current 3.7.1 version?
Note:
Sylpheed has released a 3.8.0 beta that has OAuth2 which
will allow reading/writing to Gmail servers. Reportedly
it does not work too well -- but who in their right mind
would ever want to read/write from Gmail?
I'll look at Sylpheed again. I've been using ClawsMail for years, and
to be honest, I can't quite remember exactly why I chose it over
sylpheed. I *think* PGP was the reason, but I'm not too sure now. Could
have been something else.
As for email, I will not use Gmail. I have a throwaway legacy hotmail
account, but my personal email is my ISP provided one.
Might I suggest Posteo.de which integrates GPG in its system and which
is completely open-source. It used to be endorsed by the FSF. You can
encrypt the calendar, the contact list and any incoming e-mail even if
it wasn't already encrypted by the sender. It costs a whopping 1 euro a month.
On 2025-04-10, Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 13:03:21 -0000 (UTC), Borax Man wrote:
I use Claws-Mail, which was from a fork of Sylpheed. I chose Claws-Mail >>> for its usable GPG intergration.
Sylpheed has complete GPG integration without a plugin.
Have you tried the current 3.7.1 version?
Note:
Sylpheed has released a 3.8.0 beta that has OAuth2 which
will allow reading/writing to Gmail servers. Reportedly
it does not work too well -- but who in their right mind
would ever want to read/write from Gmail?
I'll look at Sylpheed again. I've been using ClawsMail for years, and
to be honest, I can't quite remember exactly why I chose it over
sylpheed. I *think* PGP was the reason, but I'm not too sure now. Could
have been something else.
As for email, I will not use Gmail. I have a throwaway legacy hotmail account, but my personal email is my ISP provided one.
On 2025-04-11, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2025-04-11 03:10, Borax Man wrote:
On 2025-04-10, Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 13:03:21 -0000 (UTC), Borax Man wrote:
I use Claws-Mail, which was from a fork of Sylpheed. I chose Claws-Mail >>>>> for its usable GPG intergration.
Sylpheed has complete GPG integration without a plugin.
Have you tried the current 3.7.1 version?
Note:
Sylpheed has released a 3.8.0 beta that has OAuth2 which
will allow reading/writing to Gmail servers. Reportedly
it does not work too well -- but who in their right mind
would ever want to read/write from Gmail?
I'll look at Sylpheed again. I've been using ClawsMail for years, and
to be honest, I can't quite remember exactly why I chose it over
sylpheed. I *think* PGP was the reason, but I'm not too sure now. Could >>> have been something else.
As for email, I will not use Gmail. I have a throwaway legacy hotmail
account, but my personal email is my ISP provided one.
Might I suggest Posteo.de which integrates GPG in its system and which
is completely open-source. It used to be endorsed by the FSF. You can
encrypt the calendar, the contact list and any incoming e-mail even if
it wasn't already encrypted by the sender. It costs a whopping 1 euro a
month.
I am paying a bit more than that for my current email service. It used
to be part of my ISP's core service, but they've been bought out by a
larger company and subsequently have dropped their quality, and dropped email. Its now by a third party, but a local one. And I get to keep my email address, which I've had for over 20 years. That matters to me
too.
Not sure I trust the Germans with my sensetive data. I'd rather run GPG locally. Having an email client, and running it locally means its
encrypted before it leaves your machine, and the email service provider
has no hope of seeing the encrypted contents, even if under a court
order.
Thanks for the suggestion though.
On 2025-04-11 03:02, Borax Man wrote:
On 2025-04-10, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2025-04-10 08:58, Borax Man wrote:
On 2025-04-10, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 4/9/25 19:40, candycanearter07 wrote:
Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote at 20:55 this Wednesday (GMT): >>>>>>> On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 19:00:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote: >>>>>>>
Well, if you COULD get more people to migrate to USENET from traditional
social media, that would be great. I personally don't think many people
are going to want to learn a new software for such an old protocol. >>>>>>>>
Well, then, maybe they should stop using email. After all, that protocol
goes back to at least 1975.
Most people use a website for email, and Gmail/Outlook.
I see nothing but security issues in using web-based e-mail myself. If >>>>> my e-mail is not configured in a client like Betterbird, I also find it >>>>> incredibly inconvenient.
< snip >
Usenet is still very much viable as is IRC. All that is required >>>>>>> is for more people to start using it -- again.
The case is closed.
I agree, the main problem from my pov is barrier to entry and
"precivable" benefits. Yes, obviously, USENET is great for being simple >>>>>> and decrentralized, but the average person would not care/understand >>>>>> what being "decentralized" means, and the simplicity is seen as a
drawback. And as for barrier to entry, the only real client people would >>>>>> be likely/willing to use would be Thunderbird, since everything else is >>>>>> either old (again, /I/ don't care, but ppl definitely would), highly >>>>>> specialized FOSS programs that most of the time are targeted to Linux, >>>>>> or a TUI program. And they have to configure the newsreader to connect >>>>>> to a server, FIND a server, etc etc.. and no layman would go through >>>>>> that just for a "retro forum experience that has barely any users". As >>>>>> well as the general tech illiteracy. So, IF the barrier to entry was >>>>>> lowered, and potentially a webapp made, people MIGHT be willing to try >>>>>> it. I think that's a pretty long shot, though.
Good luck getting people to use IRC again. I spent my adolescence on >>>>> there, but it is clear that it is not attracting the same kind of people >>>>> three decades later. It's too bad because some networks, like Rizon, are >>>>> doing a fantastic job with their servers. Nonetheless, IRC apparently >>>>> isn't as appealing in its uncensored, decentralized nature as a
proprietary, centralized social medium like Instagram's comment section is.
To be honest, I'm glad that neither IRC nor Usenet attract those kinds >>>>> of people anyway. I'd rather know that I'm communicating with
sufficiently smart individuals on the old networks than the vapid,
superficial cretins on modern social media.
IRC doesn't have stickers, animated emojis, GIFs. You cannot review
messages that came through when you were offline. Almost now changing >>>> of fonts. No avatars. It takes a bit to learn (depending on the
client). No advertising, no extra "features" such as NFTs and skins or >>>> what have you. No reactions and no branding (ie, logos for chat groups). >>>>
I'm saying this not because I agree, but because this is what people
want. I do prefer the simplicity of IRC myself, bit IRC is not coming >>>> back. There are no good mobile clients...
Who the heck would want to use IRC on a cell phone anyway? It's made to
be used with a keyboard. Anyways, if people want to get off of it in
favour of something like Discord, all the power to them. However, I
wouldn't want these people to complain once they're faced with a
bombardment of advertisements and mass censorship.
People use their phones a lot for chat. Some chat places I hang out on,
I'd say MOST are on their phone. Someone younger asked me how I
responded with lng replies so quickly, and I said I was using my laptop.
They thought I was *WEIRD*! It wasn't IRC, but still, the point is
people just pull out their phones and use that, rather than a keyboard.
The phone is "just there". I think its a devolution, a backwards step
in communication, but thats what is happening.
I'll say this much: being exposed to today's youth on a daily basis, I
can confirm that this generation is dumber than the previous and that it
too was dumber than the one that preceded it. We're all getting better
at using software, but we're forgetting how to accomplish basic, more critical tasks. I might have mentioned it before but I use an old
MacBook Air 2017 with Linux Mint in the classroom. From time to time,
while the screen is mirrored to a larger screen in the class, I might
open up a terminal and simply write in "sudo apt upgrade." To the kids,
I'm hacking. Similarly, a student asked me how great my "new" computer
is by asking me how many pings it has. These are kids who don't know how
to write an introduction or a conclusion to a text despite it being
taught to them in both language classes they have, who make mistakes
such as "je n'est pas de question" which translates to "I don't is a question" in English despite the language being a part of their daily
lives, who don't know whether 6 on 10 is a passing mark, etc.. I guess
it shouldn't be surprising that the progressive political parties get so
much support considering the intellect of the populace.
On 2025-04-11, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2025-04-11 03:02, Borax Man wrote:
On 2025-04-10, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2025-04-10 08:58, Borax Man wrote:
On 2025-04-10, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 4/9/25 19:40, candycanearter07 wrote:
Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote at 20:55 this Wednesday (GMT): >>>>>>>> On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 19:00:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote: >>>>>>>>
Well, if you COULD get more people to migrate to USENET from traditional
social media, that would be great. I personally don't think many people
are going to want to learn a new software for such an old protocol. >>>>>>>>>
Well, then, maybe they should stop using email. After all, that protocol
goes back to at least 1975.
Most people use a website for email, and Gmail/Outlook.
I see nothing but security issues in using web-based e-mail myself. If >>>>>> my e-mail is not configured in a client like Betterbird, I also find it >>>>>> incredibly inconvenient.
< snip >
Usenet is still very much viable as is IRC. All that is required >>>>>>>> is for more people to start using it -- again.
The case is closed.
I agree, the main problem from my pov is barrier to entry and
"precivable" benefits. Yes, obviously, USENET is great for being simple >>>>>>> and decrentralized, but the average person would not care/understand >>>>>>> what being "decentralized" means, and the simplicity is seen as a >>>>>>> drawback. And as for barrier to entry, the only real client people would
be likely/willing to use would be Thunderbird, since everything else is >>>>>>> either old (again, /I/ don't care, but ppl definitely would), highly >>>>>>> specialized FOSS programs that most of the time are targeted to Linux, >>>>>>> or a TUI program. And they have to configure the newsreader to connect >>>>>>> to a server, FIND a server, etc etc.. and no layman would go through >>>>>>> that just for a "retro forum experience that has barely any users". As >>>>>>> well as the general tech illiteracy. So, IF the barrier to entry was >>>>>>> lowered, and potentially a webapp made, people MIGHT be willing to try >>>>>>> it. I think that's a pretty long shot, though.
Good luck getting people to use IRC again. I spent my adolescence on >>>>>> there, but it is clear that it is not attracting the same kind of people >>>>>> three decades later. It's too bad because some networks, like Rizon, are >>>>>> doing a fantastic job with their servers. Nonetheless, IRC apparently >>>>>> isn't as appealing in its uncensored, decentralized nature as a
proprietary, centralized social medium like Instagram's comment section is.
To be honest, I'm glad that neither IRC nor Usenet attract those kinds >>>>>> of people anyway. I'd rather know that I'm communicating with
sufficiently smart individuals on the old networks than the vapid, >>>>>> superficial cretins on modern social media.
IRC doesn't have stickers, animated emojis, GIFs. You cannot review >>>>> messages that came through when you were offline. Almost now changing >>>>> of fonts. No avatars. It takes a bit to learn (depending on the
client). No advertising, no extra "features" such as NFTs and skins or >>>>> what have you. No reactions and no branding (ie, logos for chat groups). >>>>>
I'm saying this not because I agree, but because this is what people >>>>> want. I do prefer the simplicity of IRC myself, bit IRC is not coming >>>>> back. There are no good mobile clients...
Who the heck would want to use IRC on a cell phone anyway? It's made to >>>> be used with a keyboard. Anyways, if people want to get off of it in
favour of something like Discord, all the power to them. However, I
wouldn't want these people to complain once they're faced with a
bombardment of advertisements and mass censorship.
People use their phones a lot for chat. Some chat places I hang out on,
I'd say MOST are on their phone. Someone younger asked me how I
responded with lng replies so quickly, and I said I was using my laptop. >>> They thought I was *WEIRD*! It wasn't IRC, but still, the point is
people just pull out their phones and use that, rather than a keyboard.
The phone is "just there". I think its a devolution, a backwards step
in communication, but thats what is happening.
I'll say this much: being exposed to today's youth on a daily basis, I
can confirm that this generation is dumber than the previous and that it
too was dumber than the one that preceded it. We're all getting better
at using software, but we're forgetting how to accomplish basic, more
critical tasks. I might have mentioned it before but I use an old
MacBook Air 2017 with Linux Mint in the classroom. From time to time,
while the screen is mirrored to a larger screen in the class, I might
open up a terminal and simply write in "sudo apt upgrade." To the kids,
I'm hacking. Similarly, a student asked me how great my "new" computer
is by asking me how many pings it has. These are kids who don't know how
to write an introduction or a conclusion to a text despite it being
taught to them in both language classes they have, who make mistakes
such as "je n'est pas de question" which translates to "I don't is a
question" in English despite the language being a part of their daily
lives, who don't know whether 6 on 10 is a passing mark, etc.. I guess
it shouldn't be surprising that the progressive political parties get so
much support considering the intellect of the populace.
Not too many of my generation really knew their way around a computer
either. Some learned it, because you needed to to get Napster working,
or install Grand Prix 2 addons or whatever. The difference is today you don't need to learn anything. I've seen chimps use phones, whereas back
in the early 90s, you kind of had to learn a bit of DOS to do anything
on your computer. Many people learned how to "CD" to a directory,
perhaps run "A:setup", start a program, but just that and not much more.
You couldn't get far not knowing the OS in the past, but you can get far today. This is probably true with everything, there is a greater
tolerance of ignorance and lower standards. Technology hides all the details, but that was a trend even 30 years ago when "User Friendly" was
a widely used buzzword. Does this mean the kids are dumber? Well, hard
to say. Demographics has changed, which adds another variable, but demographic change aside I don't think there has been a loss in
intelligence, just more pandering and fewer demands. Tech companies do
their utmost to hide the inner workings, so we have people who have no
idea what can actually be done.
I'm often amazed at work how crappy our workflows are, that despite all
the computing power, we do things in a really inefficnet way, such as
taking screenshots of Excel pages, putting the screenshot in an email, sending it to someone else, for them to enter that data into another
excel spreadsheet, which they can't copy and past, because its a
screenshot, but have to visually read and type, then send it back to
those who sent the screenshot for verification. There are far, far
better solutions, but they simply are not taught about them, are not
aware of them.
Probably why stuff gets reinvented all the time. People forget, or are unware of things like NNTP and IRC, and just reinvent it again.
I'd rather run GPG
locally. Having an email client, and running it locally means its
encrypted before it leaves your machine, and the email service provider
has no hope of seeing the encrypted contents, even if under a court
order.
In the case of NNTP, American Congress seems to have been succesful in killing most of it. If I remember correctly, some poorly informed
politician had no idea what was going on on Usenet or even how to use
it, but he felt that he could complain about its contents anyway. As a result, ISPs stopped providing a news server.
I am paying a bit more than that for my current email service. It used
to be part of my ISP's core service, but they've been bought out by a
larger company and subsequently have dropped their quality, and dropped email. Its now by a third party, but a local one. And I get to keep my email address, which I've had for over 20 years. That matters to me
too.
As for email, I will not use Gmail. I have a throwaway legacy hotmail account, but my personal email is my ISP provided one.
Remove feces-eating trannies like Joel.
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 11:22:54 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
In the case of NNTP, American Congress seems to have been succesful in
killing most of it. If I remember correctly, some poorly informed
politician had no idea what was going on on Usenet or even how to use
it, but he felt that he could complain about its contents anyway. As a
result, ISPs stopped providing a news server.
The ISP is used dropped their news server year ago. It required a huge
amount of storage and processing power. Even before it was phased out a server in Berlin was more responsive than one 8 miles away.
Luckily for those who like Usenet, there are free servers around that
they can use. However, there is no reason to believe that they'll be
around forever. If ever the people running Eternal September decide to
stop their operations and paid servers become the only game in town, I
doubt that Usenet will have even the number of users it has today.
On 2025-04-11 09:44, Borax Man wrote:
On 2025-04-11, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2025-04-11 03:02, Borax Man wrote:
On 2025-04-10, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2025-04-10 08:58, Borax Man wrote:
On 2025-04-10, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 4/9/25 19:40, candycanearter07 wrote:
Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote at 20:55 this Wednesday (GMT): >>>>>>>>> On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 19:00:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote: >>>>>>>>>
Well, if you COULD get more people to migrate to USENET from traditional
social media, that would be great. I personally don't think many people
are going to want to learn a new software for such an old protocol. >>>>>>>>>>
Well, then, maybe they should stop using email. After all, that protocol
goes back to at least 1975.
Most people use a website for email, and Gmail/Outlook.
I see nothing but security issues in using web-based e-mail myself. If >>>>>>> my e-mail is not configured in a client like Betterbird, I also find it >>>>>>> incredibly inconvenient.
< snip >
Usenet is still very much viable as is IRC. All that is required >>>>>>>>> is for more people to start using it -- again.
The case is closed.
I agree, the main problem from my pov is barrier to entry and
"precivable" benefits. Yes, obviously, USENET is great for being simple
and decrentralized, but the average person would not care/understand >>>>>>>> what being "decentralized" means, and the simplicity is seen as a >>>>>>>> drawback. And as for barrier to entry, the only real client people would
be likely/willing to use would be Thunderbird, since everything else is
either old (again, /I/ don't care, but ppl definitely would), highly >>>>>>>> specialized FOSS programs that most of the time are targeted to Linux, >>>>>>>> or a TUI program. And they have to configure the newsreader to connect >>>>>>>> to a server, FIND a server, etc etc.. and no layman would go through >>>>>>>> that just for a "retro forum experience that has barely any users". As >>>>>>>> well as the general tech illiteracy. So, IF the barrier to entry was >>>>>>>> lowered, and potentially a webapp made, people MIGHT be willing to try >>>>>>>> it. I think that's a pretty long shot, though.
Good luck getting people to use IRC again. I spent my adolescence on >>>>>>> there, but it is clear that it is not attracting the same kind of people
three decades later. It's too bad because some networks, like Rizon, are
doing a fantastic job with their servers. Nonetheless, IRC apparently >>>>>>> isn't as appealing in its uncensored, decentralized nature as a
proprietary, centralized social medium like Instagram's comment section is.
To be honest, I'm glad that neither IRC nor Usenet attract those kinds >>>>>>> of people anyway. I'd rather know that I'm communicating with
sufficiently smart individuals on the old networks than the vapid, >>>>>>> superficial cretins on modern social media.
IRC doesn't have stickers, animated emojis, GIFs. You cannot review >>>>>> messages that came through when you were offline. Almost now changing >>>>>> of fonts. No avatars. It takes a bit to learn (depending on the
client). No advertising, no extra "features" such as NFTs and skins or >>>>>> what have you. No reactions and no branding (ie, logos for chat groups).
I'm saying this not because I agree, but because this is what people >>>>>> want. I do prefer the simplicity of IRC myself, bit IRC is not coming >>>>>> back. There are no good mobile clients...
Who the heck would want to use IRC on a cell phone anyway? It's made to >>>>> be used with a keyboard. Anyways, if people want to get off of it in >>>>> favour of something like Discord, all the power to them. However, I
wouldn't want these people to complain once they're faced with a
bombardment of advertisements and mass censorship.
People use their phones a lot for chat. Some chat places I hang out on, >>>> I'd say MOST are on their phone. Someone younger asked me how I
responded with lng replies so quickly, and I said I was using my laptop. >>>> They thought I was *WEIRD*! It wasn't IRC, but still, the point is
people just pull out their phones and use that, rather than a keyboard. >>>> The phone is "just there". I think its a devolution, a backwards step >>>> in communication, but thats what is happening.
I'll say this much: being exposed to today's youth on a daily basis, I
can confirm that this generation is dumber than the previous and that it >>> too was dumber than the one that preceded it. We're all getting better
at using software, but we're forgetting how to accomplish basic, more
critical tasks. I might have mentioned it before but I use an old
MacBook Air 2017 with Linux Mint in the classroom. From time to time,
while the screen is mirrored to a larger screen in the class, I might
open up a terminal and simply write in "sudo apt upgrade." To the kids,
I'm hacking. Similarly, a student asked me how great my "new" computer
is by asking me how many pings it has. These are kids who don't know how >>> to write an introduction or a conclusion to a text despite it being
taught to them in both language classes they have, who make mistakes
such as "je n'est pas de question" which translates to "I don't is a
question" in English despite the language being a part of their daily
lives, who don't know whether 6 on 10 is a passing mark, etc.. I guess
it shouldn't be surprising that the progressive political parties get so >>> much support considering the intellect of the populace.
Not too many of my generation really knew their way around a computer
either. Some learned it, because you needed to to get Napster working,
or install Grand Prix 2 addons or whatever. The difference is today you
don't need to learn anything. I've seen chimps use phones, whereas back
in the early 90s, you kind of had to learn a bit of DOS to do anything
on your computer. Many people learned how to "CD" to a directory,
perhaps run "A:setup", start a program, but just that and not much more.
You couldn't get far not knowing the OS in the past, but you can get far
today. This is probably true with everything, there is a greater
tolerance of ignorance and lower standards. Technology hides all the
details, but that was a trend even 30 years ago when "User Friendly" was
a widely used buzzword. Does this mean the kids are dumber? Well, hard
to say. Demographics has changed, which adds another variable, but
demographic change aside I don't think there has been a loss in
intelligence, just more pandering and fewer demands. Tech companies do
their utmost to hide the inner workings, so we have people who have no
idea what can actually be done.
I'm often amazed at work how crappy our workflows are, that despite all
the computing power, we do things in a really inefficnet way, such as
taking screenshots of Excel pages, putting the screenshot in an email,
sending it to someone else, for them to enter that data into another
excel spreadsheet, which they can't copy and past, because its a
screenshot, but have to visually read and type, then send it back to
those who sent the screenshot for verification. There are far, far
better solutions, but they simply are not taught about them, are not
aware of them.
Probably why stuff gets reinvented all the time. People forget, or are
unware of things like NNTP and IRC, and just reinvent it again.
In the case of NNTP, American Congress seems to have been succesful in killing most of it. If I remember correctly, some poorly informed
politician had no idea what was going on on Usenet or even how to use
it, but he felt that he could complain about its contents anyway. As a result, ISPs stopped providing a news server. The result is that those
of us on Usenet are usually people who lived in the before times and are aware of its existence. I doubt that people under the age of 40 even
know what a Usenet is. As for IRC, it is never mentioned to users of the Internet. Few web sites talk about it and ISPs themselves don't even
mention its existence. After all, there is no money in it, so why would
they bother. Instead, people are told about things like Discord and
TikTok because there is a way of monetizing a user's presence on those
sites. Once again, the people on IRC are usually Linux users who venture
onto their distribution of choice's support channel, or people from he
before times who are aware of its existence.
Not sure I trust the Germans with my sensetive data.
I cannot image the kind of supremely doltish moron that would actually
use web mail.
Give me wonderful Sylpheed, the absolute best email client anywhere.
It is built on GTK+2 (not +3)
and it is quick, slick, and a supreme joy to use. Nothing could ever
be better.
Le 11-04-2025, Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> a écrit :
Not sure I trust the Germans with my sensetive data.
Why? I would understand if you couldn't anyone with your sensitive data. That's the only way. But why not the Germans? They lack far behind US
and China in the need to be extremely careful in what you give them.
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 19:30:36 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
Luckily for those who like Usenet, there are free servers around that
they can use. However, there is no reason to believe that they'll be
around forever. If ever the people running Eternal September decide to
stop their operations and paid servers become the only game in town, I
doubt that Usenet will have even the number of users it has today.
I've used individual.net at the Free University of Berlin for years. It wa free but now costs 10 Euros / year. It was about $15 but fell
considerably. The Euro rebounded to 1.14 USD today, the highest in three years. Still a bargain. It doesn't do binary groups, but neither do I.
On 2025-04-12, Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> wrote:
Le 11-04-2025, Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> a écrit :
Not sure I trust the Germans with my sensetive data.
Why? I would understand if you couldn't anyone with your sensitive data.
That's the only way. But why not the Germans? They lack far behind US
and China in the need to be extremely careful in what you give them.
They are overly sensetive about "hate speech", so consider censorship
and surveillance to be warranted.
On 2025-04-11, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2025-04-11 09:44, Borax Man wrote:
On 2025-04-11, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2025-04-11 03:02, Borax Man wrote:
On 2025-04-10, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2025-04-10 08:58, Borax Man wrote:
On 2025-04-10, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 4/9/25 19:40, candycanearter07 wrote:
Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote at 20:55 this Wednesday (GMT): >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 19:00:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
Well, if you COULD get more people to migrate to USENET from traditional
social media, that would be great. I personally don't think many people
are going to want to learn a new software for such an old protocol. >>>>>>>>>>>
Well, then, maybe they should stop using email. After all, that protocol
goes back to at least 1975.
Most people use a website for email, and Gmail/Outlook.
I see nothing but security issues in using web-based e-mail myself. If >>>>>>>> my e-mail is not configured in a client like Betterbird, I also find it
incredibly inconvenient.
< snip >
Usenet is still very much viable as is IRC. All that is required >>>>>>>>>> is for more people to start using it -- again.
The case is closed.
I agree, the main problem from my pov is barrier to entry and >>>>>>>>> "precivable" benefits. Yes, obviously, USENET is great for being simple
and decrentralized, but the average person would not care/understand >>>>>>>>> what being "decentralized" means, and the simplicity is seen as a >>>>>>>>> drawback. And as for barrier to entry, the only real client people would
be likely/willing to use would be Thunderbird, since everything else is
either old (again, /I/ don't care, but ppl definitely would), highly >>>>>>>>> specialized FOSS programs that most of the time are targeted to Linux,
or a TUI program. And they have to configure the newsreader to connect
to a server, FIND a server, etc etc.. and no layman would go through >>>>>>>>> that just for a "retro forum experience that has barely any users". As
well as the general tech illiteracy. So, IF the barrier to entry was >>>>>>>>> lowered, and potentially a webapp made, people MIGHT be willing to try
it. I think that's a pretty long shot, though.
Good luck getting people to use IRC again. I spent my adolescence on >>>>>>>> there, but it is clear that it is not attracting the same kind of people
three decades later. It's too bad because some networks, like Rizon, are
doing a fantastic job with their servers. Nonetheless, IRC apparently >>>>>>>> isn't as appealing in its uncensored, decentralized nature as a >>>>>>>> proprietary, centralized social medium like Instagram's comment section is.
To be honest, I'm glad that neither IRC nor Usenet attract those kinds >>>>>>>> of people anyway. I'd rather know that I'm communicating with
sufficiently smart individuals on the old networks than the vapid, >>>>>>>> superficial cretins on modern social media.
IRC doesn't have stickers, animated emojis, GIFs. You cannot review >>>>>>> messages that came through when you were offline. Almost now changing >>>>>>> of fonts. No avatars. It takes a bit to learn (depending on the >>>>>>> client). No advertising, no extra "features" such as NFTs and skins or >>>>>>> what have you. No reactions and no branding (ie, logos for chat groups).
I'm saying this not because I agree, but because this is what people >>>>>>> want. I do prefer the simplicity of IRC myself, bit IRC is not coming >>>>>>> back. There are no good mobile clients...
Who the heck would want to use IRC on a cell phone anyway? It's made to >>>>>> be used with a keyboard. Anyways, if people want to get off of it in >>>>>> favour of something like Discord, all the power to them. However, I >>>>>> wouldn't want these people to complain once they're faced with a
bombardment of advertisements and mass censorship.
People use their phones a lot for chat. Some chat places I hang out on, >>>>> I'd say MOST are on their phone. Someone younger asked me how I
responded with lng replies so quickly, and I said I was using my laptop. >>>>> They thought I was *WEIRD*! It wasn't IRC, but still, the point is
people just pull out their phones and use that, rather than a keyboard. >>>>> The phone is "just there". I think its a devolution, a backwards step >>>>> in communication, but thats what is happening.
I'll say this much: being exposed to today's youth on a daily basis, I >>>> can confirm that this generation is dumber than the previous and that it >>>> too was dumber than the one that preceded it. We're all getting better >>>> at using software, but we're forgetting how to accomplish basic, more
critical tasks. I might have mentioned it before but I use an old
MacBook Air 2017 with Linux Mint in the classroom. From time to time,
while the screen is mirrored to a larger screen in the class, I might
open up a terminal and simply write in "sudo apt upgrade." To the kids, >>>> I'm hacking. Similarly, a student asked me how great my "new" computer >>>> is by asking me how many pings it has. These are kids who don't know how >>>> to write an introduction or a conclusion to a text despite it being
taught to them in both language classes they have, who make mistakes
such as "je n'est pas de question" which translates to "I don't is a
question" in English despite the language being a part of their daily
lives, who don't know whether 6 on 10 is a passing mark, etc.. I guess >>>> it shouldn't be surprising that the progressive political parties get so >>>> much support considering the intellect of the populace.
Not too many of my generation really knew their way around a computer
either. Some learned it, because you needed to to get Napster working,
or install Grand Prix 2 addons or whatever. The difference is today you >>> don't need to learn anything. I've seen chimps use phones, whereas back >>> in the early 90s, you kind of had to learn a bit of DOS to do anything
on your computer. Many people learned how to "CD" to a directory,
perhaps run "A:setup", start a program, but just that and not much more. >>> You couldn't get far not knowing the OS in the past, but you can get far >>> today. This is probably true with everything, there is a greater
tolerance of ignorance and lower standards. Technology hides all the
details, but that was a trend even 30 years ago when "User Friendly" was >>> a widely used buzzword. Does this mean the kids are dumber? Well, hard >>> to say. Demographics has changed, which adds another variable, but
demographic change aside I don't think there has been a loss in
intelligence, just more pandering and fewer demands. Tech companies do
their utmost to hide the inner workings, so we have people who have no
idea what can actually be done.
I'm often amazed at work how crappy our workflows are, that despite all
the computing power, we do things in a really inefficnet way, such as
taking screenshots of Excel pages, putting the screenshot in an email,
sending it to someone else, for them to enter that data into another
excel spreadsheet, which they can't copy and past, because its a
screenshot, but have to visually read and type, then send it back to
those who sent the screenshot for verification. There are far, far
better solutions, but they simply are not taught about them, are not
aware of them.
Probably why stuff gets reinvented all the time. People forget, or are
unware of things like NNTP and IRC, and just reinvent it again.
In the case of NNTP, American Congress seems to have been succesful in
killing most of it. If I remember correctly, some poorly informed
politician had no idea what was going on on Usenet or even how to use
it, but he felt that he could complain about its contents anyway. As a
result, ISPs stopped providing a news server. The result is that those
of us on Usenet are usually people who lived in the before times and are
aware of its existence. I doubt that people under the age of 40 even
know what a Usenet is. As for IRC, it is never mentioned to users of the
Internet. Few web sites talk about it and ISPs themselves don't even
mention its existence. After all, there is no money in it, so why would
they bother. Instead, people are told about things like Discord and
TikTok because there is a way of monetizing a user's presence on those
sites. Once again, the people on IRC are usually Linux users who venture
onto their distribution of choice's support channel, or people from he
before times who are aware of its existence.
Yes, I remember my ISP carried Usenet, and cancelled it. I'm in
Australia though, so it may be for different reasons.
It could simply
have been too much bother. It would have taken a lot of bandwidth and storage for something most customers weren't aware of. It was sad to
see it go, and I do wish they maintained it, but from a business point
of view, I do understand. They cancelled it mid or late 2000s, or
possible later.
I suppose then it is our job to mention these technologies and make
people aware of alternatives to the privacy traps and algorthmic
straight jackets that more modern alternatives hoist on thier
victims... um... users...
I set these up for my own personal clique, but they're not much into communicating anyway, or are simply put or, or confused, by any client
that is not web based or an "app". Unfortunately, I've not been able to
find a good NNTP web frontend that allows only encrypted connections.
Maybe I'll get to work on modifying an existing one to make it the way I think it should be.
Wrong. Mutt is better.
It is built on GTK+2 (not +3)
Which means: it's bloated.
It's full of distracting useless shiny
things. When I'm reading an email, I'm expecting to see something to
read, not something to print and to display on my walls.
If it can't run on a terminal: it's bloated. Simple and easy.
Mutt was, is and will ever be better.
On 4/12/25 02:40, Borax Man wrote:[ * snip * ]
On 2025-04-11, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2025-04-11 09:44, Borax Man wrote:
In the case of NNTP, American Congress seems to have been succesful in
killing most of it. If I remember correctly, some poorly informed
politician had no idea what was going on on Usenet or even how to use
it, but he felt that he could complain about its contents anyway. As a
result, ISPs stopped providing a news server. The result is that those
of us on Usenet are usually people who lived in the before times and are >>> aware of its existence. I doubt that people under the age of 40 even
know what a Usenet is. As for IRC, it is never mentioned to users of the >>> Internet. Few web sites talk about it and ISPs themselves don't even
mention its existence. After all, there is no money in it, so why would
they bother. Instead, people are told about things like Discord and
TikTok because there is a way of monetizing a user's presence on those
sites. Once again, the people on IRC are usually Linux users who venture >>> onto their distribution of choice's support channel, or people from he
before times who are aware of its existence.
Yes, I remember my ISP carried Usenet, and cancelled it. I'm in
Australia though, so it may be for different reasons.
Depending on when it happened, it was probably caused by the decision of
the American Congress. Much like how the United States and other
countries in the West were convinced that Mortal Kombat and Night Trap
were going to traumatize a generation and we needed video game ratings,
they were convinced that Usenet was the center of all degeneracy. People should not be surprised that countries in the Five Eyes Alliance all
behave similarly, which is why both Canadians and Americans should be concerned that Brits are currently being arrested and sentenced for
sharing memes on social media.
It could simply
have been too much bother. It would have taken a lot of bandwidth and
storage for something most customers weren't aware of. It was sad to
see it go, and I do wish they maintained it, but from a business point
of view, I do understand. They cancelled it mid or late 2000s, or
possible later.
I suppose then it is our job to mention these technologies and make
people aware of alternatives to the privacy traps and algorthmic
straight jackets that more modern alternatives hoist on thier
victims... um... users...
I set these up for my own personal clique, but they're not much into
communicating anyway, or are simply put or, or confused, by any client
that is not web based or an "app". Unfortunately, I've not been able to
find a good NNTP web frontend that allows only encrypted connections.
Maybe I'll get to work on modifying an existing one to make it the way I
think it should be.
I think that the bandwidth argument is an excuse. Even the "hotbed of degeneracy and piracy" argument is a weak one. In reality, our Western governments didn't like the fact that Usenet is an uncontrolled
environment where you can truly say what you think and discuss topics
that they consider to be taboo. They don't believe in freedom of speech,
so they are ready to take away any platform which protects it.
On 4/12/25 06:17, Borax Man wrote:
On 2025-04-12, Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> wrote:
Le 11-04-2025, Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> a écrit :
Not sure I trust the Germans with my sensetive data.
Why? I would understand if you couldn't anyone with your sensitive data. >>> That's the only way. But why not the Germans? They lack far behind US
and China in the need to be extremely careful in what you give them.
They are overly sensetive about "hate speech", so consider censorship
and surveillance to be warranted.
I have already decided that I will never set foot in Britain or Germany, despite my wife's love for everything European. I can't respect their
war on freedom of speech and don't want to even accidentally give these people money. I'm not surprised that the area that spawned Peter the
Klöwn would wage war against a European's right to speak or tell the
truth yet disregard all crimes committed by anyone whose skin is
off-white or darker.
On 2025-04-12, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 4/12/25 02:40, Borax Man wrote:[ * snip * ]
On 2025-04-11, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
Given what has happened in the 2020s, and recently what has been exposedOn 2025-04-11 09:44, Borax Man wrote:Yes, I remember my ISP carried Usenet, and cancelled it. I'm in
In the case of NNTP, American Congress seems to have been succesful
in killing most of it. If I remember correctly, some poorly informed
politician had no idea what was going on on Usenet or even how to use
it, but he felt that he could complain about its contents anyway. As
a result, ISPs stopped providing a news server. The result is that
those of us on Usenet are usually people who lived in the before
times and are aware of its existence. I doubt that people under the
age of 40 even know what a Usenet is. As for IRC, it is never
mentioned to users of the Internet. Few web sites talk about it and
ISPs themselves don't even mention its existence. After all, there is
no money in it, so why would they bother. Instead, people are told
about things like Discord and TikTok because there is a way of
monetizing a user's presence on those sites. Once again, the people
on IRC are usually Linux users who venture onto their distribution of
choice's support channel, or people from he before times who are
aware of its existence.
Australia though, so it may be for different reasons.
Depending on when it happened, it was probably caused by the decision
of the American Congress. Much like how the United States and other
countries in the West were convinced that Mortal Kombat and Night Trap
were going to traumatize a generation and we needed video game ratings,
they were convinced that Usenet was the center of all degeneracy.
People should not be surprised that countries in the Five Eyes Alliance
all behave similarly, which is why both Canadians and Americans should
be concerned that Brits are currently being arrested and sentenced for
sharing memes on social media.
It could simply have been too much bother. It would have taken a lot
of bandwidth and storage for something most customers weren't aware
of. It was sad to see it go, and I do wish they maintained it, but
from a business point of view, I do understand. They cancelled it mid
or late 2000s, or possible later.
I suppose then it is our job to mention these technologies and make
people aware of alternatives to the privacy traps and algorthmic
straight jackets that more modern alternatives hoist on thier
victims... um... users...
I set these up for my own personal clique, but they're not much into
communicating anyway, or are simply put or, or confused, by any client
that is not web based or an "app". Unfortunately, I've not been able
to find a good NNTP web frontend that allows only encrypted
connections. Maybe I'll get to work on modifying an existing one to
make it the way I think it should be.
I think that the bandwidth argument is an excuse. Even the "hotbed of
degeneracy and piracy" argument is a weak one. In reality, our Western
governments didn't like the fact that Usenet is an uncontrolled
environment where you can truly say what you think and discuss topics
that they consider to be taboo. They don't believe in freedom of
speech,
so they are ready to take away any platform which protects it.
with regards to government meddling in Social Media, I think this is a credible hypothesis. I think the storage and bandwidth would have contributed, if the ISP's were pressured, to not push back too much.
There WERE a lot of binaries floating around, I do remember that. Also, Usenet didn't have that much dissident political discussion on it, that
I could see. There was more to be found on Web Forums that Usenet, so
it could have been a target, but I don't think it was lucrative a target
as you might think.
On 2025-04-12, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 4/12/25 06:17, Borax Man wrote:
On 2025-04-12, Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> wrote:
Le 11-04-2025, Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> a écrit :
Not sure I trust the Germans with my sensetive data.
Why? I would understand if you couldn't anyone with your sensitive data. >>>> That's the only way. But why not the Germans? They lack far behind US
and China in the need to be extremely careful in what you give them.
They are overly sensetive about "hate speech", so consider censorship
and surveillance to be warranted.
I have already decided that I will never set foot in Britain or Germany,
despite my wife's love for everything European. I can't respect their
war on freedom of speech and don't want to even accidentally give these
people money. I'm not surprised that the area that spawned Peter the
Klöwn would wage war against a European's right to speak or tell the
truth yet disregard all crimes committed by anyone whose skin is
off-white or darker.
Germany does not have a good history with state suppression, and what
I've seen they don't believe in free speech, think "Hate Speech" is
something should be banned.
That means they cannot be trusted with my
data. Any people who believe that certain forms of speech much be
policed cannot be trusted with regards to privacy. They will have
strong motivation to work against it.
You've touch on an important point as well, the more determined the
state is to enforce diversity and tolerance, the less free it becomes.
On 2025-04-12, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 4/12/25 02:40, Borax Man wrote:[ * snip * ]
On 2025-04-11, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2025-04-11 09:44, Borax Man wrote:
In the case of NNTP, American Congress seems to have been succesful in >>>> killing most of it. If I remember correctly, some poorly informed
politician had no idea what was going on on Usenet or even how to use
it, but he felt that he could complain about its contents anyway. As a >>>> result, ISPs stopped providing a news server. The result is that those >>>> of us on Usenet are usually people who lived in the before times and are >>>> aware of its existence. I doubt that people under the age of 40 even
know what a Usenet is. As for IRC, it is never mentioned to users of the >>>> Internet. Few web sites talk about it and ISPs themselves don't even
mention its existence. After all, there is no money in it, so why would >>>> they bother. Instead, people are told about things like Discord and
TikTok because there is a way of monetizing a user's presence on those >>>> sites. Once again, the people on IRC are usually Linux users who venture >>>> onto their distribution of choice's support channel, or people from he >>>> before times who are aware of its existence.
Yes, I remember my ISP carried Usenet, and cancelled it. I'm in
Australia though, so it may be for different reasons.
Depending on when it happened, it was probably caused by the decision of
the American Congress. Much like how the United States and other
countries in the West were convinced that Mortal Kombat and Night Trap
were going to traumatize a generation and we needed video game ratings,
they were convinced that Usenet was the center of all degeneracy. People
should not be surprised that countries in the Five Eyes Alliance all
behave similarly, which is why both Canadians and Americans should be
concerned that Brits are currently being arrested and sentenced for
sharing memes on social media.
It could simply
have been too much bother. It would have taken a lot of bandwidth and
storage for something most customers weren't aware of. It was sad to
see it go, and I do wish they maintained it, but from a business point
of view, I do understand. They cancelled it mid or late 2000s, or
possible later.
I suppose then it is our job to mention these technologies and make
people aware of alternatives to the privacy traps and algorthmic
straight jackets that more modern alternatives hoist on thier
victims... um... users...
I set these up for my own personal clique, but they're not much into
communicating anyway, or are simply put or, or confused, by any client
that is not web based or an "app". Unfortunately, I've not been able to >>> find a good NNTP web frontend that allows only encrypted connections.
Maybe I'll get to work on modifying an existing one to make it the way I >>> think it should be.
I think that the bandwidth argument is an excuse. Even the "hotbed of
degeneracy and piracy" argument is a weak one. In reality, our Western
governments didn't like the fact that Usenet is an uncontrolled
environment where you can truly say what you think and discuss topics
that they consider to be taboo. They don't believe in freedom of speech,
so they are ready to take away any platform which protects it.
Given what has happened in the 2020s, and recently what has been exposed
with regards to government meddling in Social Media, I think this is a credible hypothesis. I think the storage and bandwidth would have contributed, if the ISP's were pressured, to not push back too much.
There WERE a lot of binaries floating around, I do remember that. Also, Usenet didn't have that much dissident political discussion on it, that
I could see. There was more to be found on Web Forums that Usenet, so
it could have been a target, but I don't think it was lucrative a target
as you might think.
One said something along
the lines of "all boys love sports" and the other said "all girls enjoy romantic movies." To the woke cretins in the classroom, this was sexist.
The fact that it was a grammatical exercise escaped them. They would
have gladly caused whoever was responsible for writing the exercise at
the publishing fired for that.
On 4/12/25 18:58, Borax Man wrote:
On 2025-04-12, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 4/12/25 06:17, Borax Man wrote:
On 2025-04-12, Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> wrote:
Le 11-04-2025, Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> a écrit :
Not sure I trust the Germans with my sensetive data.
Why? I would understand if you couldn't anyone with your sensitive data. >>>>> That's the only way. But why not the Germans? They lack far behind US >>>>> and China in the need to be extremely careful in what you give them. >>>>>
They are overly sensetive about "hate speech", so consider censorship
and surveillance to be warranted.
I have already decided that I will never set foot in Britain or Germany, >>> despite my wife's love for everything European. I can't respect their
war on freedom of speech and don't want to even accidentally give these
people money. I'm not surprised that the area that spawned Peter the
Klöwn would wage war against a European's right to speak or tell the
truth yet disregard all crimes committed by anyone whose skin is
off-white or darker.
Germany does not have a good history with state suppression, and what
I've seen they don't believe in free speech, think "Hate Speech" is
something should be banned.
Except that there is no universal definition of "hate speech," so what
they are banning is "anything the government doesn't like." Besides,
hate speech is the very thing freedom of speech is meant to protect
since just any sentence uttered can be considered hateful. Heck, I gave
a grammar exercise to my students a couple of years ago and there were
two sentences that caused some of them alarm. One said something along
the lines of "all boys love sports" and the other said "all girls enjoy romantic movies." To the woke cretins in the classroom, this was sexist.
The fact that it was a grammatical exercise escaped them. They would
have gladly caused whoever was responsible for writing the exercise at
the publishing fired for that.
That means they cannot be trusted with my
data. Any people who believe that certain forms of speech much be
policed cannot be trusted with regards to privacy. They will have
strong motivation to work against it.
You've touch on an important point as well, the more determined the
state is to enforce diversity and tolerance, the less free it becomes.
To them, freedom means "the freedom to repeat the state's narrative." Anything else is prohibited.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 52:32:41 |
| Calls: | 10,397 |
| Calls today: | 5 |
| Files: | 14,067 |
| Messages: | 6,417,384 |
| Posted today: | 1 |