4 ms·

Didn't alt.barney.die.die.die.die have more dies? I don't remember exactly Usenet was a cost to ISPs unfortunately. But, it wasn't centrally controlled or mode

Didn't alt.barney.die.die.die.die have more dies? I don't remember exactly Usenet was a cost to ISPs unfortunately. But, it wasn't centrally controlled or moderated either. It also was minimally technical to use, which served as a good filter. But I guess reddit's subreddits may be the best alternative with viewership and specific groups/areas. You know... it should be possible with tagging to take something like twitter reddit, and generate "views" that are groups. Maybe make some spec with three letters, maybe R and an S, and heck another S for the hell of it. Balkanization and content gardens/API walls block integration of like minded content.

deltarholamda 4y ago
The cost to ISPs was mostly in the binaries groups, and some usenet servers were set up as a paid service for this purpose when ISPs started dropping the binaries groups. I don't blame the ISPs for this. At the time, you could be an ISP with what is essentially a low-end home Internet connection now, but it cost thousands per month. What started the downfall of Usenet was Eternal September when AOL let their hoi polloi access the Big Boy Internet. The "Me-tooer" phenomenon was particularly irritating.
- jrnichols 4y ago
  > What started the downfall of Usenet was Eternal September that, and the unfortunate but probably not unexpected flood of actual child abuse photos. this became a huge problem real fast. an ISP I worked for back in that day dropped NNTP like a hot potato when the company lawyers caught wind of the potential legal issues.
armitron 4y ago
Reddit is not an alternative as it is heavily censored (same as HN really) and centralized. Usenet still exists and discussions still take place there. Being a decentralized protocol, censoring (or scoring, killfiling) someone is left up to you. And this is the major advantage of Usenet. You can’t be silenced by a mob, which leads to freedom of expression and disparate views. Sure there is spam and flames, but one gets all the tools one needs to deal with that. There is no committee deciding what posts should be kept or deleted. We are a lot worse off today than we used to be, largely because of the centralization of discourse.
- Supermancho 4y ago
  > Sure there is spam and flames, but one gets all the tools one needs to deal with that. Asking the user to implement measures and keep them up-to-date is detrimental to adoption from users that are aware of curated sources. Pretending this is net-neutral is misleading. > We are a lot worse off today than we used to be, largely because of the centralization of discourse. Usenet was centralized in practice, so I think you mean something else. It's not clear how much the curation of content stifles discourse when creating new forums is essentially free. Either way, I would tend to disagree that curated is worse. Everyone curates to some degree, even when they are free and open discussions.
  - midislack 4y ago
    Usenet is just better in this respect. Nobody says anybody has to use it.
- cbm-vic-20 4y ago
  Usenet was not driven by advertising, so it wasn't constantly pushing "click bait" and other unsolicited nefarious content onto its users. You could spew all the dumb misinformation you wanted to in your newsgroup, and it wouldn't leak into the more sane newsgroups (unless someone crossposted).
  - NoGravitas 4y ago
    Unless you mentioned Turkey, in which case your group would suddenly see massive cross-posting by Serdar Argic.
amysox 4y ago
You're thinking of the ".word.word.word" convention for newsgroup names. The last word would be repeated three times. The prototype for this was "alt.swedish.chef.bork.bork.bork," though "alt.wesley.crusher.die.die.die" (and the related "alt.ensign.wesley.die.die.die") came soon thereafter. The name of the group you're thinking of was probably something like "alt.dinosaurs.barney.die.die.die."

deltarholamda 4y ago

The cost to ISPs was mostly in the binaries groups, and some usenet servers were set up as a paid service for this purpose when ISPs started dropping the binaries groups. I don't blame the ISPs for this. At the time, you could be an ISP with what is essentially a low-end home Internet connection now, but it cost thousands per month. What started the downfall of Usenet was Eternal September when AOL let their hoi polloi access the Big Boy Internet. The "Me-tooer" phenomenon was particularly irritating.

jrnichols 4y ago
> What started the downfall of Usenet was Eternal September that, and the unfortunate but probably not unexpected flood of actual child abuse photos. this became a huge problem real fast. an ISP I worked for back in that day dropped NNTP like a hot potato when the company lawyers caught wind of the potential legal issues.

armitron 4y ago

Reddit is not an alternative as it is heavily censored (same as HN really) and centralized. Usenet still exists and discussions still take place there. Being a decentralized protocol, censoring (or scoring, killfiling) someone is left up to you. And this is the major advantage of Usenet. You can’t be silenced by a mob, which leads to freedom of expression and disparate views. Sure there is spam and flames, but one gets all the tools one needs to deal with that. There is no committee deciding what posts should be kept or deleted. We are a lot worse off today than we used to be, largely because of the centralization of discourse.

Supermancho 4y ago
> Sure there is spam and flames, but one gets all the tools one needs to deal with that. Asking the user to implement measures and keep them up-to-date is detrimental to adoption from users that are aware of curated sources. Pretending this is net-neutral is misleading. > We are a lot worse off today than we used to be, largely because of the centralization of discourse. Usenet was centralized in practice, so I think you mean something else. It's not clear how much the curation of content stifles discourse when creating new forums is essentially free. Either way, I would tend to disagree that curated is worse. Everyone curates to some degree, even when they are free and open discussions.
- midislack 4y ago
  Usenet is just better in this respect. Nobody says anybody has to use it.
cbm-vic-20 4y ago
Usenet was not driven by advertising, so it wasn't constantly pushing "click bait" and other unsolicited nefarious content onto its users. You could spew all the dumb misinformation you wanted to in your newsgroup, and it wouldn't leak into the more sane newsgroups (unless someone crossposted).
- NoGravitas 4y ago
  Unless you mentioned Turkey, in which case your group would suddenly see massive cross-posting by Serdar Argic.

amysox 4y ago

You're thinking of the ".word.word.word" convention for newsgroup names. The last word would be repeated three times. The prototype for this was "alt.swedish.chef.bork.bork.bork," though "alt.wesley.crusher.die.die.die" (and the related "alt.ensign.wesley.die.die.die") came soon thereafter. The name of the group you're thinking of was probably something like "alt.dinosaurs.barney.die.die.die."