Usenet newsgroups[Telecom]

Below was posted all over the AT&T Usenet server today, what is the use of having the service if they are dropping it, any 3rd party ones suck.

Please note that on or around July 15, 2009, AT&T will no longer be offering access to the Usenet netnews service. If you wish to continue reading , access is available through third-party vendors.

Posted only internally to AT&T Usenet Servers.

Reply to
Steven Lichter
Loading thread data ...

Why are they dropping it? The same reason my ISP dropped the Usenet - very few users.

***** Moderator's Note *****

Given that the Digest is gatewayed to Usenet and receives many of its contributions via NNTP servers, I disagree in our particular case. ;-)

This touches on a larger issue, though: attempts being made to privatize sections of the Internet such as Usenet. Various telco's have already attempted to carve out a share of the revenue generated by ISP's and search engines and various other portals, claiming that they own the wires and are therefore entitled to install electronic toll gates on them. Usenet itself, although viable now, is being pushed aside by advertiser-supported venues such as yahoo and google, both of which have large, and growing, "groups" sections that users must register to use.

Bill Horne Temporary Moderator

Reply to
monkeysaunt

I tried to find either a new ISP with the Usenet or someone that supplies Usenet, both either don't carry it or charge extra, trying to get an answer from AT&T is a waste since the support is in India.

Reply to
Steven Lichter
***** Moderator's Note *****

There is no registration to read Usenet via Google.

***** Moderator's Note *****

Nor on Yahoo, but those who want to post on either system have to go through a vetting process. In either case, as much as half the screen is taking up by ads, many keyed to the subject matter in the post(s) a viewer chooses to read.

Bill Horne Temporary Moderator

Please put [Telecom] at the end of your subject line, or I may never see your post! Thanks!

We have a new address for email submissions: telecomdigestmoderator atsign telecom-digest.org. This is only for those who submit posts via email: if you use a newsreader or a web interface to contribute to the digest, you don't need to change anything.

Reply to
hancock4

Here is a free text only newsgroup source..

Usenet News. The server has a 100MBit connection to several Internet backbones and is integrated into the Usenet via more than 60 peers.

newsgroups. It requires a registration that can be done online.

Reply to
Steve Stone

I have used Google [and I] don't really like the way it runs, plus you can't block your address: I used it a long time ago and my g-mail account is still usless. Don't know anything about Yahoo, guess I'll look.

Reply to
Steven Lichter

I logged on and signed up, now all I have to do is configure it to my reader which happens to be theirs; Thunderbird.

Reply to
Steven Lichter

I don't know, I've been using Motzarella for some time and it's fairly reliable.

Reply to
T

I just started using it today and sent a test post through to bill and it got there. Right now AT&T us working and for the most part I'll stick with it until the switch. this reply is via Motzarellla. At&T is getting a lot of flack, don't know it it will do any good.

Reply to
Steven Lichter

I have used a 3rd party Usenet supplier for the last 13 years, first Internet America that dropped a news service that I used, then the relatively low cost Teranews ($3.95 to sign up, but low daily usage), and finally Giganews.

I still pay about $12.95 a month for this service and I still use Forte Agent as my reader. Yeah, noise to signal ratio is getting out of hand, but the mp3 binaries are still there :-)

Carl

***** Moderator's Note *****

When I think about, I can't really object too much if Usenet's servers are consolidated: the original distributed model was, after all, necessary because data links weren't reliable and nntp posts could be moved in off-hours. Now, the Internet's transport layer is very reliable, so a few large, reliable servers can take the place of lots of small ones.

But, I'm still scared that owners of large NNTP servers will start inserting ads.

Bill Horne Temporary Moderator

Please put [Telecom] at the end of your subject line, or I may never see your post! Thanks!

We have a new address for email submissions: telecomdigestmoderator atsign telecom-digest.org. This is only for those who submit posts via email: if you use a newsreader or a web interface to contribute to the digest, you don't need to change anything.

Reply to
Carl Navarro

Worse, those who *post* from the googlegroups web-access Usenet system are likely *not* to be seen by purists (using "real" newsreaders, and fed by "real" nntp-servers) who filter out all posts (many of which tend, in fact, to be phish or other spam) emanating from googlegroups.

But I might add Aioe.org to the small but growing list of no-charge, "real", nntp servers, alongside Motzarella.org :-) .

Cheers, -- tlvp

Reply to
tlvp

I disagree about the ads. With Google Groups they're so innocuous I'm not even aware the 2 or 3 are even there (see below). With a simple setup using a file on one's system (Linux, UNIX, Windows, whatever) as one's "home page", getting to comp.dcom.telecom is 2 clicks and far easier and faster than using "traditional" news readers.

First example is a display of my "home page" that is identical on all my systems (Linux, UNIX and Windows):

I can either click on the row of buttons along the top to move to a "chapter" or I can scroll down to it. Clicking [GROUP] brings me to here:

Clicking [CD.telecom] brings me to Google Group comp.dcom.telecom:

And clicking on an article thread brings me to the message to which I'm presently responding:

Simple. Another example is if I click [INET] on my home page, I'm transferred to this page of useful Internet tools:

A local file home page works even if one's Internet connection is down, contrasted to the situation if MSNBC, Yahoo, Google, et al are one's "home page".

Reply to
Thad Floryan

The thing is, an operation the size of ATT, there is absolutely nothing you can say or do that will affect their bottom line in any detectable way. So why should they care?

If you're in any sort of metro area (and maybe even if you're not), there are probably smallish local ISPs, more likely than not run by techie types who understand that "the Internet" is not a synonym for "the worldwide web". Sometimes they have resource issues that a multinational wouldn't have, but OTOH when you call, whoever answers the phone will understand what you are talking about and be able to fix it, without your having to climb through three layers of script monkeys (some time ago, on a different ISP than I now use, I once called with a problem and got the owner out of the shower). Many of these ISPs still offer USENET, either subbed out (mine current ISP uses Giganews) or run in-house (another local ISP's owner runs a free USENET server on the side,

formatting link
Small local vendors are more likely to notice your business, appreciate it, and be responsive. ATT doesn't care, they don't have to, they're the phone company.*

Dave

___________

*Lily Tomlin said that, of course, back before the Internet was invented. But it hasn't changed.

***** Moderator's Note *****

It's a shame that most of the local service providers have been replaced by meg-o-corp ISP's. Pioneers such as Ward Christensen (Inventor of xmodem), who started the first BBS, and famous local celebrities such as He-Who-Greps at The World, have either faded to obscurity or been driven out of business by competitors who rely on glitzy graphics and a "do anything you want, but don't ask us to help" policy to reap profits from ill-educated digital consumers.

Is The Well still in business? I know Cliff Stoll wrote about it in one of his books: IIRC, Silicon Snake Oil. I hope it is: the sense of community and shared values that The Well had have been sorely missed in the larger Internet.

Bill Horne Temporary Moderator

Reply to
Dave Garland

Careful ;) aioe.org is regarded as the "home of trolls and identity thieves" by many long-time usenet posters. Do a "google groups" archive search for keywords "aioe" and "aioe.org" in a newsgroup like 'sci.electronics.repair' and read some of the unfortunate threads emanating from that host. "aioe.org" may be more frequently filtered than "groups.google.com", the latter which most assuredly deserves its reputation as well.

Michael

***** Moderator's Note *****

Sounds like a crock. If aioe.org is an nntp server, then it's messages would be distributed through Usenet in the usual fashion, so if anyone was being a troll or abuser, the reputation would follow the poster.

BTW, what reputation are you inferring for groups.google.com? The same paradigm applies.

Bill Horne Temporary Moderator

Reply to
Michael Grigoni

As I said I found one to use and it seems to be fine,

Having spend 30 years working for GTE in Network Operations ans Systems I understand things on how the company operates. They are getting a lot of flack and calls to their Corporate offices. I have a contact person at the Director Level; having had some major cable problems that finally got them to replace almost a mile of 40 year old cable.

I have looked at other ISPs in the area, they either use AT&T or are really not cost effective. In a year or so we are going to move to out of California to the Pacific Northwest, it is now Verizon, but that will be changing with the sale.

[Moderator snip]
Reply to
Steven Lichter

Carl Navarro wrote in :

That could be a viable business-model for 'free' text-only usenet access. But I'd be more scared of such an ad-supported service making it too easy to sign up and post leaving Usenet with the spam to wade through.

Running a news-server at a university is a (very) small part of my job (and our user community is not prone to spamming). I think there would be a market for text-only Usenet service, authenticated (to make spammers traceable) and for a modest price.

formatting link
lists a number of dedicated providers (although most are specializing in binaries).

Koos van den Hout

Reply to
Koos van den Hout
[Moderator snip]

There is a system being tested which they clain will do away with spam, I'm waiting to see it.

Reply to
Steven Lichter
***** Moderator's Note *****

There WERE other solutions and it worked quite well for a relatively long time. Alas, too much water over the dam now to go back.

It is pretty much "personal" responsibility, that is, each node being responsible for a couple of pretty simple rules regarding it's own users, the most important ones were "Stay on topic" and limit your cross-posts to relevant groups.

You want to bitch and moan and just generally raise hell.......there are groups FOR THAT; just keep it where it belongs.

That all gradually went south as nodes stopped watching what it's users were doing AND as irresponsible hubs let on nodes that they knew were going to be rogues because they thought it was cute or funny or believed that the Usenet should be an anarchy.

If NOBODY would peer with a rogue, spamming sites......there wouldn't BE any rogue, spamming sites. It was called the Usenet Death Penalty and was very effective.......for a while.

Goose, golden eggs, dead.

***** Moderator's Note *****

Spam prevention is always going to be an arms race: until the Internet Engineering Consortium designs a way to prevent it entirely (actually, a way to drop it below profitability), we're going to have to implement new countermeasures every so often.

Bill Horne Temporary Moderator

Reply to
Who Me?

Indeed it does. It's a matter of practicality. Nodes that offer a haven to trolls and kooks and those who are sociopathic gain a reputation that "sticks" to all the users there.

It doesn't have to be "fair" or "right"......one is known by the company you keep.

When the sig/noise ratio becomes low enough, as it apparently HAS with aioe and certainly has for google.groups, then you miss out on little or nothing of value by filtering on the source of the injection rather than trying to keep track of constantly morphing individual posters.

***** Moderator's Note *****

Ah, but my point is that any filtering _you_ do doesn't affect most Usenet readers (unless you're running an NNTP server), so other Usenet users must judge posts by other means. Flagging a particular server or site isn't going to make a difference beyond _your_ environment.

Using filters at end-points isn't a viable solution, because it doesn't scale and requires training for all users. After all, very few users even know that filters are available, let alone how to plonk someone.

Bill Horne Temporary Moderator

Reply to
Who Me?

Perhaps Michael was being funny? I visited the website

formatting link
and they have limits to posting. In fact the limits are such that I as a legitimate USENET user couldn't use them. I can't imagine a spammer making good use of their servers.

I went through this last year when Road Runner dropped USENET. I settled on Altopia.com for $6/month. Very fast servers, always work, etc. I ended up dropping them for other reasons and am now using motzarella.org. I'm not overly impressed, but since I'm paying nothing and I don't even get a spam tagline, I'm not going to complain.

I really hope USENET isn't dying. My first taste of the Internet was via USENET in 1987 and I've been hooked every since.

John

Reply to
John Mayson

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.