Slashdot.org is carrying that story today (my timezone) and it is
amazing the number of supposedly tech-orientated people who believe that crap. https://tech.slashdot.org/story/23/12/20/2147253/the-rise-and-fall-of-usenet I did not bother complaining to zdnet or the original author, I did
weigh in on the Slashdot discussion. Unfortunately it was around 10
hours after that article was posted and the ill-informed had all already posted and moved on.
Title: End of an Era: Google Groups to Drop Usenet Support
Author: Rob Pegoraro
Date: December 16, 2023
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
In early 2000, I wrote a column for the Washington Post about the
growing uselessness of many newsgroups in which I quoted one of Usenet’s developers, computer-science professor Steve Bellovin, shrugging off its possible demise: “Times and technologies change--20 years is a great run for anything.”
Almost 24 years later, that quote has held up better than Usenet. --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
Source: https://www.pcmag.com/news/end-of-an-era-google-groups-to-drop-usenet-support
Andrew wrote:
Slashdot.org is carrying that story today (my timezone) and it is
amazing the number of supposedly tech-orientated people who believe that
crap.
https://tech.slashdot.org/story/23/12/20/2147253/the-rise-and-fall-of-usenet >> I did not bother complaining to zdnet or the original author, I did
weigh in on the Slashdot discussion. Unfortunately it was around 10
hours after that article was posted and the ill-informed had all already
posted and moved on.
Not a particularly active thread as far as slashdot goes (or used to go)
more of a "feh, who cares?"
Julieta Shem wrote:
Title: End of an Era: Google Groups to Drop Usenet Support
Author: Rob Pegoraro
Date: December 16, 2023
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
In early 2000, I wrote a column for the Washington Post about the
growing uselessness of many newsgroups in which I quoted one of Usenet’s >> developers, computer-science professor Steve Bellovin, shrugging off its
possible demise: “Times and technologies change--20 years is a great run >> for anything.”
Almost 24 years later, that quote has held up better than Usenet.
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
Source:
https://www.pcmag.com/news/end-of-an-era-google-groups-to-drop-usenet-support
Slashdot.org is carrying that story today (my timezone) and it is
amazing the number of supposedly tech-orientated people who believe that >crap. >https://tech.slashdot.org/story/23/12/20/2147253/the-rise-and-fall-of-usenet >I did not bother complaining to zdnet or the original author, I did
weigh in on the Slashdot discussion. Unfortunately it was around 10
hours after that article was posted and the ill-informed had all already >posted and moved on.
Andrew wrote:
Slashdot.org is carrying that story today (my timezone) and it is
amazing the number of supposedly tech-orientated people who believe
that crap.
https://tech.slashdot.org/story/23/12/20/2147253/the-rise-and-fall-of-usenet >>
I did not bother complaining to zdnet or the original author, I did
weigh in on the Slashdot discussion. Unfortunately it was around 10
hours after that article was posted and the ill-informed had all
already posted and moved on.
Not a particularly active thread as far as slashdot goes (or used to go)
more of a "feh, who cares?"
Source:
https://www.pcmag.com/news/end-of-an-era-google-groups-to-drop-usenet-support
Slashdot.org is carrying that story today (my timezone) and it is
amazing the number of supposedly tech-orientated people who believe that >crap. >https://tech.slashdot.org/story/23/12/20/2147253/the-rise-and-fall-of-usenet >I did not bother complaining to zdnet or the original author, I did
weigh in on the Slashdot discussion. Unfortunately it was around 10
hours after that article was posted and the ill-informed had all already >posted and moved on.
snipAndrew wrote:
Slashdot.org is carrying that story today (my timezone) and it is
amazing the number of supposedly tech-orientated people who believe
that crap.
https://tech.slashdot.org/story/23/12/20/2147253/the-rise-and-fall-of-usenet
Look at the comment counts on the other articles, should I change the
Subject above for this reply?
"Slashdot considered near death - USENET".
Remember the "Slashdot effect"? That was decades ago.
Slashdot.org is carrying that story today (my timezone) and it is
amazing the number of supposedly tech-orientated people who believe that crap. https://tech.slashdot.org/story/23/12/20/2147253/the-rise-and-fall-of-usenet I did not bother complaining to zdnet or the original author, I did
weigh in on the Slashdot discussion. Unfortunately it was around 10
hours after that article was posted and the ill-informed had all already posted and moved on.
On Thu, 21 Dec 2023 12:20:17 +0100, Andrew <Doug@hyperspace.vogon.gov> wrote:
Julieta Shem wrote:snip
Source:
https://www.pcmag.com/news/end-of-an-era-google-groups-to-drop-usenet-support
Slashdot.org is carrying that story today (my timezone) and it is
amazing the number of supposedly tech-orientated people who believe that
crap.
https://tech.slashdot.org/story/23/12/20/2147253/the-rise-and-fall-of-usenet >> I did not bother complaining to zdnet or the original author, I did
weigh in on the Slashdot discussion. Unfortunately it was around 10
hours after that article was posted and the ill-informed had all already
posted and moved on.
they are only doing their duty . . . propagating the narrative
On 21/12/2023 11:20, Andrew wrote:
Slashdot.org is carrying that story today (my timezone) and it is
amazing the number of supposedly tech-orientated people who believe
that crap.
https://tech.slashdot.org/story/23/12/20/2147253/the-rise-and-fall-of-usenet >>
I did not bother complaining to zdnet or the original author, I did
weigh in on the Slashdot discussion. Unfortunately it was around 10
hours after that article was posted and the ill-informed had all
already posted and moved on.
I like this reply: <https://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=23167544&cid=64095553>
Quoting the whole thing ...
"
The whole article totally misrepresents what is happening.
Usenet relies on distributed servers all over the world. These servers
have administrators and one of their main tasks is to filter out the
spam, they talk to each other - often via usenet - and swap Spamassassin settings - not via usenet because the spammers are watching there too.
Then you have Google Groups. Around 98% (could be more) of the spam in
usenet gets there via GG, and Google simply does not f***ing care. Back
at the start of November, some groups were getting thousands of
thai-language spam messages a day, all entered via GG. That is when the admins started using spamassassin and I believe the spamassassin
settings the admins use only check messages entered via Google Groups (although that could be incorrect), they certainly get a higher weighting.
It got to the stage where the consensus amongst the admins was moving
towards ceasing to accept messages input via GG.
Then someone found a way to get a bug-report into Google's system, I
think some Android developers use Usenet and that was how he managed it.
It was less than a week later that Google decided to drop Groups, in a
few weeks time they will no longer accept postings, not even from usenet servers where the admins actually care.
Usenet is not dead, what is happening here is that the main vector for
spam is closing its doors. My own opinion is that this was never about
spam, it was a DOS attack on usenet.
The reaction to Google's announcement on the forums (newsgroups) where
this was being discussed was rejoicing.
If anyone wants to look at some newsgroups which were being hit really
hard until the 2nd/3rd of November, try
comp.lang.cobol
comp.lang.fortran
comp.lang.c (36314 spams in the first 10 days of October)
comp.lang.c++
comp.arch
sci.lang.japan
news.cyber23.de
There were a fair number of other groups affected. When the admins
started attacking this s*** they sent "delete" requests out to their
peers so they could take out the garbage themselves, a lot of the
discussion in recent weeks is about identifying false-positives and
tweaking the settings accordingly.
I'm assuming Google ignored these requests so it should be possible to
see the damage there.
"
In article <um171h$qr8s$1@paganini.bofh.team>,
Andrew <Doug@hyperspace.vogon.gov> wrote:
Slashdot.org is carrying that story today (my timezone) and it is
amazing the number of supposedly tech-orientated people who
believe that crap.
I did not bother complaining to zdnet or the original author, I
did weigh in on the Slashdot discussion. Unfortunately it was
around 10 hours after that article was posted and the
ill-informed had all already posted and moved on.
Stupid as stupid can be!
On 21/12/2023 11:20, Andrew wrote:
Slashdot.org is carrying that story today (my timezone) and it is
amazing the number of supposedly tech-orientated people who believe that
crap.
https://tech.slashdot.org/story/23/12/20/2147253/the-rise-and-fall-of-usenet >> I did not bother complaining to zdnet or the original author, I did
weigh in on the Slashdot discussion. Unfortunately it was around 10
hours after that article was posted and the ill-informed had all already
posted and moved on.
I like this reply: ><https://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=23167544&cid=64095553>
Quoting the whole thing ...
"
The whole article totally misrepresents what is happening.
Usenet relies on distributed servers all over the world. These servers
have administrators and one of their main tasks is to filter out the
spam, they talk to each other - often via usenet - and swap Spamassassin >settings - not via usenet because the spammers are watching there too.
Then you have Google Groups. Around 98% (could be more) of the spam in
usenet gets there via GG, and Google simply does not f***ing care. Back
at the start of November, some groups were getting thousands of
thai-language spam messages a day, all entered via GG. That is when the >admins started using spamassassin and I believe the spamassassin
settings the admins use only check messages entered via Google Groups >(although that could be incorrect), they certainly get a higher weighting.
It got to the stage where the consensus amongst the admins was moving
towards ceasing to accept messages input via GG.
Then someone found a way to get a bug-report into Google's system, I
think some Android developers use Usenet and that was how he managed it.
It was less than a week later that Google decided to drop Groups, in a
few weeks time they will no longer accept postings, not even from usenet >servers where the admins actually care.
Usenet is not dead, what is happening here is that the main vector for
spam is closing its doors. My own opinion is that this was never about
spam, it was a DOS attack on usenet.
The reaction to Google's announcement on the forums (newsgroups) where
this was being discussed was rejoicing.
If anyone wants to look at some newsgroups which were being hit really
hard until the 2nd/3rd of November, try
comp.lang.cobol
comp.lang.fortran
comp.lang.c (36314 spams in the first 10 days of October)
comp.lang.c++
comp.arch
sci.lang.japan
news.cyber23.de
There were a fair number of other groups affected. When the admins
started attacking this s*** they sent "delete" requests out to their
peers so they could take out the garbage themselves, a lot of the
discussion in recent weeks is about identifying false-positives and
tweaking the settings accordingly.
I'm assuming Google ignored these requests so it should be possible to
see the damage there.
"
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 18:54:36 |
| Calls: | 10,389 |
| Files: | 14,061 |
| Messages: | 6,416,958 |