8 ms·
Google has bought dejanews and has profited immensely from open source and open information. So I do think they have an obligation either a) to make the whole
by none10287 6y ago
Google has bought dejanews and has profited immensely from open source and open information.
So I do think they have an obligation either a) to make the whole archive available for anyone or b) maintain it properly.
Properly means restoring the fast UI from around 2004.
- nine_k 6y agoHow did it profit from the Usenet archives? Genuinely curious.
- goatinaboat 6y agoHow did it profit from the Usenet archives? Genuinely curious. Dejanews was the seed material for Google Groups, any profit derived from that (ads) was from content posted to Usenet by people who never intended for it to be used for that.
- joshuamorton 6y agoGroups doesn't (and didn't ever?) Show ads as far as I know. So you're reaching for second or third order effects at best.
- mtkd 6y agoYou think that realtime ad impressions is all they get from you reading granular forum posts? Sadly, even in 2020, nothing has yet replaced what Deja was at the time it got acquired and destroyed.
- joshuamorton 6y ago> So you're reaching for second or third order effects at best. I'm curious what second or third order effects you think a usenet archive had on GG.
- mtkd 6y agoFrom G side they gained users interacting with 50K+ topics and occasionally posting views, sentiment etc. (and likely all Deja News historic interactions) In addition to the search history, email content, geo location etc. G have for many people
- happycube 6y agoDeja did a fairly good job at destroying itself beforehand - not just financially.
- imglorp 6y agoIf you found a human at Google instead of a bot, it would probably say their only obligation is to their shareholders. It's probably not a good idea to depend on a public company to steward an important community. Does the Internet Archive have copies of all the old stuff at least?
- lstodd 6y agoTheir only obligation, if we take for granted that there are any humans left at Google, is keeping the aforementioned bots powered. Which is sad, but expected.
- dependenttypes 6y agoThere are quite a few humans at Google, both in HN and at twitter. Sadly all of them that I talked with seemed like people that I would not want to interact with again.
- wegs 6y agoSmug, superior, arrogant, yet surprisingly incompetent? (Disclaimer: I know some really awesome people at Google who I respect the heck out of; that's just my impression of the /prevailing/ culture there now, but it's far from everyone)
- skinkestek 6y agoWarning: contains snark. Not all googlers are bad but I am grumpy. There's now one you despise so much as the one you loved that betrayed you and all that. ------------- Busily making sure it feels even more lame to try to give them feedback? Or wondering what thriving ecosystem they can destroy next after - destroying rss, - participating in destroying federated messaging, - trying to kill all independent browser engines and replace it with a nerfed on that "sadly" can't block ads Some ideas: Maybe they can come up with a more opaque way to shut down peoples accounts? Or maybe a more sneaky way to befriend the Chinese government?
- microtherion 6y agoI remember how awesome the initial version of the Google usenet archive was. It's horrifying how much they have let the UX deteriorate.