Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> looked up from reading the
entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
say:

>On 2/29/2024 11:29 AM, Ant wrote:
>> Mike S. <Mike_S@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 10:49:36 -0500, Spalls Hurgenson
>>> <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Yeah, there's apparently been a dramatic decline in reported spam now
>>>> that Google has shut down public access to its Usenet feed.
>>
>>> The spam is gone for me. Hopefully, gone forever.
>>
>> Yep. There will still be some spammers, but not from Google Groups. Man, it's too quiet on usenet. [grin]
>
>"Sensors are picking up movement, sir! A LOT of movement!!"

Paraphrasing slightly; We've traced the Source... it's coming from
inside the house. (From When a Xenomorph Calls :)

Xocyll

On 2/29/2024 7:49 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

> Yeah, there's apparently been a dramatic decline in reported spam now
> that Google has shut down public access to its Usenet feed.
>
> Well, I'm sure the spammers will adapt. They're quite roachlike in
> that way. And if they don't, I won't shed a tear.

I'm not sure what's going on, but when I refresh I'm typically seeing
Thunderbird report around 50 new messages but it goes down to the around
5-15.

I do have some filters from when google was spamming, so I'm not sure if
it's picking things out still.

--
-Justisaur

ø-ø
(\_/)\
`-'\ `--.___,
¶¬'\( ,_.-'
\\
^'

Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com> wrote at 23:36 this Thursday (GMT):
> On 2/29/2024 7:49 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>
>> Yeah, there's apparently been a dramatic decline in reported spam now
>> that Google has shut down public access to its Usenet feed.
>>
>> Well, I'm sure the spammers will adapt. They're quite roachlike in
>> that way. And if they don't, I won't shed a tear.
>
> I'm not sure what's going on, but when I refresh I'm typically seeing
> Thunderbird report around 50 new messages but it goes down to the around
> 5-15.
>
> I do have some filters from when google was spamming, so I'm not sure if
> it's picking things out still.

I think that might just be an issue with TB. I noticed it seems to mark
a ng as having messages, but not having any when you opened it.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On 3/1/2024 11:10 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
> Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com> wrote at 23:36 this Thursday (GMT):
>> On 2/29/2024 7:49 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah, there's apparently been a dramatic decline in reported spam now
>>> that Google has shut down public access to its Usenet feed.
>>>
>>> Well, I'm sure the spammers will adapt. They're quite roachlike in
>>> that way. And if they don't, I won't shed a tear.
>>
>> I'm not sure what's going on, but when I refresh I'm typically seeing
>> Thunderbird report around 50 new messages but it goes down to the around
>> 5-15.
>>
>> I do have some filters from when google was spamming, so I'm not sure if
>> it's picking things out still.
>
> I think that might just be an issue with TB. I noticed it seems to mark
> a ng as having messages, but not having any when you opened it.

It may be picking up old messages or something? I checked and I didn't
have any filters.

--
-Justisaur

ø-ø
(\_/)\
`-'\ `--.___,
¶¬'\( ,_.-'
\\
^'

On 3/1/2024 11:10 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
> Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com> wrote at 23:36 this Thursday (GMT):
>> On 2/29/2024 7:49 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah, there's apparently been a dramatic decline in reported spam now
>>> that Google has shut down public access to its Usenet feed.
>>>
>>> Well, I'm sure the spammers will adapt. They're quite roachlike in
>>> that way. And if they don't, I won't shed a tear.
>>
>> I'm not sure what's going on, but when I refresh I'm typically seeing
>> Thunderbird report around 50 new messages but it goes down to the around
>> 5-15.
>>
>> I do have some filters from when google was spamming, so I'm not sure if
>> it's picking things out still.
>
> I think that might just be an issue with TB. I noticed it seems to mark
> a ng as having messages, but not having any when you opened it.

Oh, I'm sure there is still a fair amount of spam. Its just not the
torrents of it coming from Google anymore. Also, at least for me, a
fair number of my killfile entries are for various posters.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On 3/1/2024 12:15 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
> On 3/1/2024 11:10 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>> Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com> wrote at 23:36 this Thursday (GMT):
>>> On 2/29/2024 7:49 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yeah, there's apparently been a dramatic decline in reported spam now
>>>> that Google has shut down public access to its Usenet feed.
>>>>
>>>> Well, I'm sure the spammers will adapt. They're quite roachlike in
>>>> that way. And if they don't, I won't shed a tear.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what's going on, but when I refresh I'm typically seeing
>>> Thunderbird report around 50 new messages but it goes down to the around
>>> 5-15.
>>>
>>> I do have some filters from when google was spamming, so I'm not sure if
>>> it's picking things out still.
>>
>> I think that might just be an issue with TB. I noticed it seems to mark
>> a ng as having messages, but not having any when you opened it.
>
> Oh, I'm sure there is still a fair amount of spam.  Its just not the
> torrents of it coming from Google anymore.  Also, at least for me, a
> fair number of my killfile entries are for various posters.
>

0 spam since GG stopped allowing posting. I'm sad they stopped
archiving though.

--
-Justisaur

ø-ø
(\_/)\
`-'\ `--.___,
¶¬'\( ,_.-'
\\
^'

Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote at 20:15 this Friday (GMT):
> On 3/1/2024 11:10 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>> Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com> wrote at 23:36 this Thursday (GMT):
>>> On 2/29/2024 7:49 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yeah, there's apparently been a dramatic decline in reported spam now
>>>> that Google has shut down public access to its Usenet feed.
>>>>
>>>> Well, I'm sure the spammers will adapt. They're quite roachlike in
>>>> that way. And if they don't, I won't shed a tear.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what's going on, but when I refresh I'm typically seeing
>>> Thunderbird report around 50 new messages but it goes down to the around
>>> 5-15.
>>>
>>> I do have some filters from when google was spamming, so I'm not sure if
>>> it's picking things out still.
>>
>> I think that might just be an issue with TB. I noticed it seems to mark
>> a ng as having messages, but not having any when you opened it.
>
> Oh, I'm sure there is still a fair amount of spam. Its just not the
> torrents of it coming from Google anymore. Also, at least for me, a
> fair number of my killfile entries are for various posters.

I don't really have local filters for spam...
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 13:18:46 -0800, Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>On 3/1/2024 12:15 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
>> On 3/1/2024 11:10 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>> Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com> wrote at 23:36 this Thursday (GMT):
>>>> On 2/29/2024 7:49 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Yeah, there's apparently been a dramatic decline in reported spam now
>>>>> that Google has shut down public access to its Usenet feed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, I'm sure the spammers will adapt. They're quite roachlike in
>>>>> that way. And if they don't, I won't shed a tear.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure what's going on, but when I refresh I'm typically seeing
>>>> Thunderbird report around 50 new messages but it goes down to the around
>>>> 5-15.
>>>>
>>>> I do have some filters from when google was spamming, so I'm not sure if
>>>> it's picking things out still.
>>>
>>> I think that might just be an issue with TB. I noticed it seems to mark
>>> a ng as having messages, but not having any when you opened it.
>>
>> Oh, I'm sure there is still a fair amount of spam.  Its just not the
>> torrents of it coming from Google anymore.  Also, at least for me, a
>> fair number of my killfile entries are for various posters.
>>
>
>0 spam since GG stopped allowing posting. I'm sad they stopped
>archiving though.

My understanding is that they didn't stop archiving. They just stopped
people from accessing the new stuff.

It is Google, after all. Rampant data-collection is sort of their
'thing'.

On 3/2/2024 9:10 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 13:18:46 -0800, Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 3/1/2024 12:15 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
>>> On 3/1/2024 11:10 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>> Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com> wrote at 23:36 this Thursday (GMT):
>>>>> On 2/29/2024 7:49 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah, there's apparently been a dramatic decline in reported spam now
>>>>>> that Google has shut down public access to its Usenet feed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, I'm sure the spammers will adapt. They're quite roachlike in
>>>>>> that way. And if they don't, I won't shed a tear.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure what's going on, but when I refresh I'm typically seeing
>>>>> Thunderbird report around 50 new messages but it goes down to the around
>>>>> 5-15.
>>>>>
>>>>> I do have some filters from when google was spamming, so I'm not sure if
>>>>> it's picking things out still.
>>>>
>>>> I think that might just be an issue with TB. I noticed it seems to mark
>>>> a ng as having messages, but not having any when you opened it.
>>>
>>> Oh, I'm sure there is still a fair amount of spam.  Its just not the
>>> torrents of it coming from Google anymore.  Also, at least for me, a
>>> fair number of my killfile entries are for various posters.
>>>
>>
>> 0 spam since GG stopped allowing posting. I'm sad they stopped
>> archiving though.
>
> My understanding is that they didn't stop archiving. They just stopped
> people from accessing the new stuff.
>
> It is Google, after all. Rampant data-collection is sort of their
> 'thing'.

From what I understand they did because 99.9+% of Usenet in terms of
data is now encrypted binaries which aren't of any use to them and would
balloon up storage for the archive much to the excess of cost/benefit.

--
-Justisaur

ø-ø
(\_/)\
`-'\ `--.___,
¶¬'\( ,_.-'
\\
^'

On 3/2/2024 9:10 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 13:18:46 -0800, Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 3/1/2024 12:15 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
>>> On 3/1/2024 11:10 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>> Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com> wrote at 23:36 this Thursday (GMT):
>>>>> On 2/29/2024 7:49 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah, there's apparently been a dramatic decline in reported spam now
>>>>>> that Google has shut down public access to its Usenet feed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, I'm sure the spammers will adapt. They're quite roachlike in
>>>>>> that way. And if they don't, I won't shed a tear.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure what's going on, but when I refresh I'm typically seeing
>>>>> Thunderbird report around 50 new messages but it goes down to the around
>>>>> 5-15.
>>>>>
>>>>> I do have some filters from when google was spamming, so I'm not sure if
>>>>> it's picking things out still.
>>>>
>>>> I think that might just be an issue with TB. I noticed it seems to mark
>>>> a ng as having messages, but not having any when you opened it.
>>>
>>> Oh, I'm sure there is still a fair amount of spam.  Its just not the
>>> torrents of it coming from Google anymore.  Also, at least for me, a
>>> fair number of my killfile entries are for various posters.
>>>
>>
>> 0 spam since GG stopped allowing posting. I'm sad they stopped
>> archiving though.
>
> My understanding is that they didn't stop archiving. They just stopped
> people from accessing the new stuff.
>
> It is Google, after all. Rampant data-collection is sort of their
> 'thing'.
>
Is it really still archiving if no one can access it?

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> looked up from reading the
entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
say:

>On 3/2/2024 9:10 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>> On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 13:18:46 -0800, Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/1/2024 12:15 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
>>>> On 3/1/2024 11:10 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>>> Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com> wrote at 23:36 this Thursday (GMT):
>>>>>> On 2/29/2024 7:49 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yeah, there's apparently been a dramatic decline in reported spam now
>>>>>>> that Google has shut down public access to its Usenet feed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well, I'm sure the spammers will adapt. They're quite roachlike in
>>>>>>> that way. And if they don't, I won't shed a tear.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not sure what's going on, but when I refresh I'm typically seeing
>>>>>> Thunderbird report around 50 new messages but it goes down to the around
>>>>>> 5-15.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I do have some filters from when google was spamming, so I'm not sure if
>>>>>> it's picking things out still.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that might just be an issue with TB. I noticed it seems to mark
>>>>> a ng as having messages, but not having any when you opened it.
>>>>
>>>> Oh, I'm sure there is still a fair amount of spam.? Its just not the
>>>> torrents of it coming from Google anymore.? Also, at least for me, a
>>>> fair number of my killfile entries are for various posters.
>>>>
>>>
>>> 0 spam since GG stopped allowing posting. I'm sad they stopped
>>> archiving though.
>>
>> My understanding is that they didn't stop archiving. They just stopped
>> people from accessing the new stuff.
>>
>> It is Google, after all. Rampant data-collection is sort of their
>> 'thing'.
>>
>Is it really still archiving if no one can access it?

Google can access it. Archives don't have to be _publicly_ available
after all.

Of course when it isn't it does seem more like Data-Hoarding, but at
least there's no associated smells and infestations.

Xocyll

On 3/2/2024 9:32 PM, Xocyll wrote:
> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> looked up from reading the
> entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
> say:
>
>> On 3/2/2024 9:10 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>> On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 13:18:46 -0800, Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/1/2024 12:15 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
>>>>> On 3/1/2024 11:10 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>>>> Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com> wrote at 23:36 this Thursday (GMT):
>>>>>>> On 2/29/2024 7:49 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yeah, there's apparently been a dramatic decline in reported spam now
>>>>>>>> that Google has shut down public access to its Usenet feed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Well, I'm sure the spammers will adapt. They're quite roachlike in
>>>>>>>> that way. And if they don't, I won't shed a tear.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not sure what's going on, but when I refresh I'm typically seeing
>>>>>>> Thunderbird report around 50 new messages but it goes down to the around
>>>>>>> 5-15.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I do have some filters from when google was spamming, so I'm not sure if
>>>>>>> it's picking things out still.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think that might just be an issue with TB. I noticed it seems to mark
>>>>>> a ng as having messages, but not having any when you opened it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, I'm sure there is still a fair amount of spam.? Its just not the
>>>>> torrents of it coming from Google anymore.? Also, at least for me, a
>>>>> fair number of my killfile entries are for various posters.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 0 spam since GG stopped allowing posting. I'm sad they stopped
>>>> archiving though.
>>>
>>> My understanding is that they didn't stop archiving. They just stopped
>>> people from accessing the new stuff.
>>>
>>> It is Google, after all. Rampant data-collection is sort of their
>>> 'thing'.
>>>
>> Is it really still archiving if no one can access it?
>
> Google can access it. Archives don't have to be _publicly_ available
> after all.
>
> Of course when it isn't it does seem more like Data-Hoarding, but at
> least there's no associated smells and infestations.
>
Google hoarding all that for their own secret purposes smells pretty bad
to me.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

In article <m9n6uiht51aburr0s0qn77ofepb9vu60ao@4ax.com>,
spallshurgenson@gmail.com says...
>
> On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 13:18:46 -0800, Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On 3/1/2024 12:15 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
> >> On 3/1/2024 11:10 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
> >>> Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com> wrote at 23:36 this Thursday (GMT):
> >>>> On 2/29/2024 7:49 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Yeah, there's apparently been a dramatic decline in reported spam now
> >>>>> that Google has shut down public access to its Usenet feed.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Well, I'm sure the spammers will adapt. They're quite roachlike in
> >>>>> that way. And if they don't, I won't shed a tear.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm not sure what's going on, but when I refresh I'm typically seeing
> >>>> Thunderbird report around 50 new messages but it goes down to the around
> >>>> 5-15.
> >>>>
> >>>> I do have some filters from when google was spamming, so I'm not sure if
> >>>> it's picking things out still.
> >>>
> >>> I think that might just be an issue with TB. I noticed it seems to mark
> >>> a ng as having messages, but not having any when you opened it.
> >>
> >> Oh, I'm sure there is still a fair amount of spam.  Its just not the
> >> torrents of it coming from Google anymore.  Also, at least for me, a
> >> fair number of my killfile entries are for various posters.
> >>
> >
> >0 spam since GG stopped allowing posting. I'm sad they stopped
> >archiving though.
>
> My understanding is that they didn't stop archiving. They just stopped
> people from accessing the new stuff.
>
> It is Google, after all. Rampant data-collection is sort of their
> 'thing'.

While its possible they might have just stopped sending data to Usenet,
it seems pretty unlikely.

Given how barely maintained their usenet infrastructure was before and
the amount of discussion that goes on on Usenet today, I doubt google
has any particular interest in any ongoing archiving. They've almost
certainly just switched off all the NNTP servers completely.

On 02/03/2024 17:40, Justisaur wrote:

> From what I understand they did because 99.9+% of Usenet in terms of
> data is now encrypted binaries which aren't of any use to them and would
> balloon up storage for the archive much to the excess of cost/benefit.
>

Have you got a source for that as I've yet to see any reasons put
forward that can be attributed to Google themselves?

In article <us1ih2$2el3a$1@dont-email.me>, noway@nochance.com says...
>
> On 02/03/2024 17:40, Justisaur wrote:
>
> > From what I understand they did because 99.9+% of Usenet in terms of
> > data is now encrypted binaries which aren't of any use to them and would
> > balloon up storage for the archive much to the excess of cost/benefit.
> >
>
> Have you got a source for that as I've yet to see any reasons put
> forward that can be attributed to Google themselves?

According to a giganews employee, a full usenet feed including binaries
is around 250TB a day:
https://www.reddit.com/r/usenet/comments/184iecj/usenet_peering/

According to this post, text usenet was around 50MB/day in 2021:
https://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.peering/c/O9oyiqpokq0/m/uG-
cFsRMBAAJ

50MB/day does seem a bit low to me, but even if it was a few orders of
magnitue more its still less than 0.001% of the traffic giganews is
supposedly seeing.

Another data point, usenetarchives.com has 3.54TB of text usenet. And
this is supposedly the Deja/Google Groups archive as of 2013 - its only
2.62TB: https://archive.org/details/usenethistorical

So pretty safe to say that binaries are *at least* 99.9% of usenet
traffic today.

On 3/3/2024 12:30 PM, David Goodwin wrote:
> In article <us1ih2$2el3a$1@dont-email.me>, noway@nochance.com says...
>>
>> On 02/03/2024 17:40, Justisaur wrote:
>>
>>> From what I understand they did because 99.9+% of Usenet in terms of
>>> data is now encrypted binaries which aren't of any use to them and would
>>> balloon up storage for the archive much to the excess of cost/benefit.
>>>
>>
>> Have you got a source for that as I've yet to see any reasons put
>> forward that can be attributed to Google themselves?
>
>
> According to a giganews employee, a full usenet feed including binaries
> is around 250TB a day:
> https://www.reddit.com/r/usenet/comments/184iecj/usenet_peering/
>
> According to this post, text usenet was around 50MB/day in 2021:
> https://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.peering/c/O9oyiqpokq0/m/uG-
> cFsRMBAAJ
>
> 50MB/day does seem a bit low to me, but even if it was a few orders of
> magnitue more its still less than 0.001% of the traffic giganews is
> supposedly seeing.
>
> Another data point, usenetarchives.com has 3.54TB of text usenet. And
> this is supposedly the Deja/Google Groups archive as of 2013 - its only
> 2.62TB: https://archive.org/details/usenethistorical
>
> So pretty safe to say that binaries are *at least* 99.9% of usenet
> traffic today.

Well, to be nitpicky that depends on how you are defining "usenet
traffic". Traffic can also be measured in number of messages. ;)

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On 03/03/2024 20:30, David Goodwin wrote:
> In article <us1ih2$2el3a$1@dont-email.me>, noway@nochance.com says...
>>
>> On 02/03/2024 17:40, Justisaur wrote:
>>
>>> From what I understand they did because 99.9+% of Usenet in terms of
>>> data is now encrypted binaries which aren't of any use to them and would
>>> balloon up storage for the archive much to the excess of cost/benefit.
>>>
>>
>> Have you got a source for that as I've yet to see any reasons put
>> forward that can be attributed to Google themselves?
>
>
> According to a giganews employee, a full usenet feed including binaries
> is around 250TB a day:
> https://www.reddit.com/r/usenet/comments/184iecj/usenet_peering/
>
> According to this post, text usenet was around 50MB/day in 2021:
> https://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.peering/c/O9oyiqpokq0/m/uG-
> cFsRMBAAJ
>
> 50MB/day does seem a bit low to me, but even if it was a few orders of
> magnitue more its still less than 0.001% of the traffic giganews is
> supposedly seeing.
>
> Another data point, usenetarchives.com has 3.54TB of text usenet. And
> this is supposedly the Deja/Google Groups archive as of 2013 - its only
> 2.62TB: https://archive.org/details/usenethistorical
>
> So pretty safe to say that binaries are *at least* 99.9% of usenet
> traffic today.

Sorry, should have made that clearer. My question was a source that,
that was one of the reasons that can reasonably be attributed to Google
themselves.

On 27/02/2024 14:35, candycanearter07 wrote:
> On 2024-02-27, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:
>> On 23/02/2024 16:10, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>
>>>> Over at World of Tanks that seems to be one of the drivers behind the
>>>> official forums being closed down or as Wargaming like to claim
>>>> 'transitioning' to Discord. In typical WG fashion though they managed
>>>> to make the situation worse by basically claiming that anyone who had
>>>> valid criticisms like say, Discord doesn't support a forum style, was
>>>> basically an old fart that should get with the times.
>>>
>>> Agreed, dc's attempt at a "forum" is awful.
>>
>> It's just not what Discord is designed for so I can't really blame them
>> for it not supporting a forum format. I do use it for our online RPG
>> group and for that it's pretty good.
>
> Yes, but the way it's implemented is absolutely terrible, especially
> with the new mobile ui. Did you know that if a thread is inactive for
> too long, the ONLY way to make it appear in the sidebar again is to send
> a message to it? There is no way to make a thread permanent.

Honestly not something that bothers me as I don't feel that's what
Discord is really there for but instead it's aimed at transient
communication.

JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote at 12:02 this Monday (GMT):
> On 27/02/2024 14:35, candycanearter07 wrote:
>> On 2024-02-27, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:
>>> On 23/02/2024 16:10, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Over at World of Tanks that seems to be one of the drivers behind the
>>>>> official forums being closed down or as Wargaming like to claim
>>>>> 'transitioning' to Discord. In typical WG fashion though they managed
>>>>> to make the situation worse by basically claiming that anyone who had
>>>>> valid criticisms like say, Discord doesn't support a forum style, was
>>>>> basically an old fart that should get with the times.
>>>>
>>>> Agreed, dc's attempt at a "forum" is awful.
>>>
>>> It's just not what Discord is designed for so I can't really blame them
>>> for it not supporting a forum format. I do use it for our online RPG
>>> group and for that it's pretty good.
>>
>> Yes, but the way it's implemented is absolutely terrible, especially
>> with the new mobile ui. Did you know that if a thread is inactive for
>> too long, the ONLY way to make it appear in the sidebar again is to send
>> a message to it? There is no way to make a thread permanent.
>
> Honestly not something that bothers me as I don't feel that's what
> Discord is really there for but instead it's aimed at transient
> communication.

Still can be kinda annoying for the way I use it..
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote at 05:53 this Sunday (GMT):
> On 3/2/2024 9:32 PM, Xocyll wrote:
>> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> looked up from reading the
>> entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
>> say:
>>
>>> On 3/2/2024 9:10 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 13:18:46 -0800, Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 3/1/2024 12:15 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/1/2024 11:10 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>>>>> Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com> wrote at 23:36 this Thursday (GMT):
>>>>>>>> On 2/29/2024 7:49 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yeah, there's apparently been a dramatic decline in reported spam now
>>>>>>>>> that Google has shut down public access to its Usenet feed.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Well, I'm sure the spammers will adapt. They're quite roachlike in
>>>>>>>>> that way. And if they don't, I won't shed a tear.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm not sure what's going on, but when I refresh I'm typically seeing
>>>>>>>> Thunderbird report around 50 new messages but it goes down to the around
>>>>>>>> 5-15.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I do have some filters from when google was spamming, so I'm not sure if
>>>>>>>> it's picking things out still.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think that might just be an issue with TB. I noticed it seems to mark
>>>>>>> a ng as having messages, but not having any when you opened it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh, I'm sure there is still a fair amount of spam.? Its just not the
>>>>>> torrents of it coming from Google anymore.? Also, at least for me, a
>>>>>> fair number of my killfile entries are for various posters.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 0 spam since GG stopped allowing posting. I'm sad they stopped
>>>>> archiving though.
>>>>
>>>> My understanding is that they didn't stop archiving. They just stopped
>>>> people from accessing the new stuff.
>>>>
>>>> It is Google, after all. Rampant data-collection is sort of their
>>>> 'thing'.
>>>>
>>> Is it really still archiving if no one can access it?
>>
>> Google can access it. Archives don't have to be _publicly_ available
>> after all.
>>
>> Of course when it isn't it does seem more like Data-Hoarding, but at
>> least there's no associated smells and infestations.
>>
> Google hoarding all that for their own secret purposes smells pretty bad
> to me.

Smells like data analysis/AI training..
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com> wrote at 17:40 this Saturday (GMT):
> On 3/2/2024 9:10 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>> On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 13:18:46 -0800, Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/1/2024 12:15 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
>>>> On 3/1/2024 11:10 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>>> Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com> wrote at 23:36 this Thursday (GMT):
>>>>>> On 2/29/2024 7:49 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yeah, there's apparently been a dramatic decline in reported spam now
>>>>>>> that Google has shut down public access to its Usenet feed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well, I'm sure the spammers will adapt. They're quite roachlike in
>>>>>>> that way. And if they don't, I won't shed a tear.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not sure what's going on, but when I refresh I'm typically seeing
>>>>>> Thunderbird report around 50 new messages but it goes down to the around
>>>>>> 5-15.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I do have some filters from when google was spamming, so I'm not sure if
>>>>>> it's picking things out still.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that might just be an issue with TB. I noticed it seems to mark
>>>>> a ng as having messages, but not having any when you opened it.
>>>>
>>>> Oh, I'm sure there is still a fair amount of spam.  Its just not the
>>>> torrents of it coming from Google anymore.  Also, at least for me, a
>>>> fair number of my killfile entries are for various posters.
>>>>
>>>
>>> 0 spam since GG stopped allowing posting. I'm sad they stopped
>>> archiving though.
>>
>> My understanding is that they didn't stop archiving. They just stopped
>> people from accessing the new stuff.
>>
>> It is Google, after all. Rampant data-collection is sort of their
>> 'thing'.
>
> From what I understand they did because 99.9+% of Usenet in terms of
> data is now encrypted binaries which aren't of any use to them and would
> balloon up storage for the archive much to the excess of cost/benefit.

And they didn't think to just...filter binaries? Or just not
include binary ng's?
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

In article <us4u40$38c81$1@dont-email.me>, candycanearter07
@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid says...
>
> Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com> wrote at 17:40 this Saturday (GMT):
> > On 3/2/2024 9:10 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> >> On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 13:18:46 -0800, Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 3/1/2024 12:15 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
> >>>> On 3/1/2024 11:10 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
> >>>>> Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com> wrote at 23:36 this Thursday (GMT):
> >>>>>> On 2/29/2024 7:49 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Yeah, there's apparently been a dramatic decline in reported spam now
> >>>>>>> that Google has shut down public access to its Usenet feed.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Well, I'm sure the spammers will adapt. They're quite roachlike in
> >>>>>>> that way. And if they don't, I won't shed a tear.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I'm not sure what's going on, but when I refresh I'm typically seeing
> >>>>>> Thunderbird report around 50 new messages but it goes down to the around
> >>>>>> 5-15.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I do have some filters from when google was spamming, so I'm not sure if
> >>>>>> it's picking things out still.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I think that might just be an issue with TB. I noticed it seems to mark
> >>>>> a ng as having messages, but not having any when you opened it.
> >>>>
> >>>> Oh, I'm sure there is still a fair amount of spam.  Its just not the
> >>>> torrents of it coming from Google anymore.  Also, at least for me, a
> >>>> fair number of my killfile entries are for various posters.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> 0 spam since GG stopped allowing posting. I'm sad they stopped
> >>> archiving though.
> >>
> >> My understanding is that they didn't stop archiving. They just stopped
> >> people from accessing the new stuff.
> >>
> >> It is Google, after all. Rampant data-collection is sort of their
> >> 'thing'.
> >
> > From what I understand they did because 99.9+% of Usenet in terms of
> > data is now encrypted binaries which aren't of any use to them and would
> > balloon up storage for the archive much to the excess of cost/benefit.
>
> And they didn't think to just...filter binaries? Or just not
> include binary ng's?

Binary newsgroups were never available via google groups and I assume
their peering didn't include them (why waste the storage if they're not
going to make any of the posted stuff available).

So Googles point was probably more that after filtering out binries
there wasn't much left which I guess is true - usenet is certainly a lot
quieter than it was when Google acquired DejaNews and setup Google
Groups.

David Goodwin <david+usenet@zx.net.nz> wrote at 19:57 this Monday (GMT):
> In article <us4u40$38c81$1@dont-email.me>, candycanearter07
> @candycanearter07.nomail.afraid says...
>>
>> Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com> wrote at 17:40 this Saturday (GMT):
>> > On 3/2/2024 9:10 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>> >> On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 13:18:46 -0800, Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On 3/1/2024 12:15 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
>> >>>> On 3/1/2024 11:10 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>> >>>>> Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com> wrote at 23:36 this Thursday (GMT):
>> >>>>>> On 2/29/2024 7:49 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Yeah, there's apparently been a dramatic decline in reported spam now
>> >>>>>>> that Google has shut down public access to its Usenet feed.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Well, I'm sure the spammers will adapt. They're quite roachlike in
>> >>>>>>> that way. And if they don't, I won't shed a tear.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> I'm not sure what's going on, but when I refresh I'm typically seeing
>> >>>>>> Thunderbird report around 50 new messages but it goes down to the around
>> >>>>>> 5-15.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> I do have some filters from when google was spamming, so I'm not sure if
>> >>>>>> it's picking things out still.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I think that might just be an issue with TB. I noticed it seems to mark
>> >>>>> a ng as having messages, but not having any when you opened it.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Oh, I'm sure there is still a fair amount of spam.  Its just not the
>> >>>> torrents of it coming from Google anymore.  Also, at least for me, a
>> >>>> fair number of my killfile entries are for various posters.
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> 0 spam since GG stopped allowing posting. I'm sad they stopped
>> >>> archiving though.
>> >>
>> >> My understanding is that they didn't stop archiving. They just stopped
>> >> people from accessing the new stuff.
>> >>
>> >> It is Google, after all. Rampant data-collection is sort of their
>> >> 'thing'.
>> >
>> > From what I understand they did because 99.9+% of Usenet in terms of
>> > data is now encrypted binaries which aren't of any use to them and would
>> > balloon up storage for the archive much to the excess of cost/benefit.
>>
>> And they didn't think to just...filter binaries? Or just not
>> include binary ng's?
>
> Binary newsgroups were never available via google groups and I assume
> their peering didn't include them (why waste the storage if they're not
> going to make any of the posted stuff available).
>
> So Googles point was probably more that after filtering out binries
> there wasn't much left which I guess is true - usenet is certainly a lot
> quieter than it was when Google acquired DejaNews and setup Google
> Groups.

It might be quieter, but we're still here :D
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> looked up from reading the
entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
say:

>On 3/2/2024 9:32 PM, Xocyll wrote:
>> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> looked up from reading the
>> entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
>> say:
>>
>>> On 3/2/2024 9:10 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 13:18:46 -0800, Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 3/1/2024 12:15 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/1/2024 11:10 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>>>>> Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com> wrote at 23:36 this Thursday (GMT):
>>>>>>>> On 2/29/2024 7:49 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yeah, there's apparently been a dramatic decline in reported spam now
>>>>>>>>> that Google has shut down public access to its Usenet feed.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Well, I'm sure the spammers will adapt. They're quite roachlike in
>>>>>>>>> that way. And if they don't, I won't shed a tear.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm not sure what's going on, but when I refresh I'm typically seeing
>>>>>>>> Thunderbird report around 50 new messages but it goes down to the around
>>>>>>>> 5-15.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I do have some filters from when google was spamming, so I'm not sure if
>>>>>>>> it's picking things out still.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think that might just be an issue with TB. I noticed it seems to mark
>>>>>>> a ng as having messages, but not having any when you opened it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh, I'm sure there is still a fair amount of spam.? Its just not the
>>>>>> torrents of it coming from Google anymore.? Also, at least for me, a
>>>>>> fair number of my killfile entries are for various posters.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 0 spam since GG stopped allowing posting. I'm sad they stopped
>>>>> archiving though.
>>>>
>>>> My understanding is that they didn't stop archiving. They just stopped
>>>> people from accessing the new stuff.
>>>>
>>>> It is Google, after all. Rampant data-collection is sort of their
>>>> 'thing'.
>>>>
>>> Is it really still archiving if no one can access it?
>>
>> Google can access it. Archives don't have to be _publicly_ available
>> after all.
>>
>> Of course when it isn't it does seem more like Data-Hoarding, but at
>> least there's no associated smells and infestations.
>>
>Google hoarding all that for their own secret purposes smells pretty bad
>to me.

I mean, what could they use it for; raising surly AI's that can't spell?

Xocyll

On 3/5/2024 7:01 AM, Xocyll wrote:
> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> looked up from reading the
> entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
> say:
>
>> On 3/2/2024 9:32 PM, Xocyll wrote:
>>> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> looked up from reading the
>>> entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
>>> say:
>>>
>>>> On 3/2/2024 9:10 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 13:18:46 -0800, Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/1/2024 12:15 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/1/2024 11:10 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>>>>>> Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com> wrote at 23:36 this Thursday (GMT):
>>>>>>>>> On 2/29/2024 7:49 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yeah, there's apparently been a dramatic decline in reported spam now
>>>>>>>>>> that Google has shut down public access to its Usenet feed.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Well, I'm sure the spammers will adapt. They're quite roachlike in
>>>>>>>>>> that way. And if they don't, I won't shed a tear.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure what's going on, but when I refresh I'm typically seeing
>>>>>>>>> Thunderbird report around 50 new messages but it goes down to the around
>>>>>>>>> 5-15.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I do have some filters from when google was spamming, so I'm not sure if
>>>>>>>>> it's picking things out still.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think that might just be an issue with TB. I noticed it seems to mark
>>>>>>>> a ng as having messages, but not having any when you opened it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Oh, I'm sure there is still a fair amount of spam.? Its just not the
>>>>>>> torrents of it coming from Google anymore.? Also, at least for me, a
>>>>>>> fair number of my killfile entries are for various posters.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 0 spam since GG stopped allowing posting. I'm sad they stopped
>>>>>> archiving though.
>>>>>
>>>>> My understanding is that they didn't stop archiving. They just stopped
>>>>> people from accessing the new stuff.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is Google, after all. Rampant data-collection is sort of their
>>>>> 'thing'.
>>>>>
>>>> Is it really still archiving if no one can access it?
>>>
>>> Google can access it. Archives don't have to be _publicly_ available
>>> after all.
>>>
>>> Of course when it isn't it does seem more like Data-Hoarding, but at
>>> least there's no associated smells and infestations.
>>>
>> Google hoarding all that for their own secret purposes smells pretty bad
>> to me.
>
> I mean, what could they use it for; raising surly AI's that can't spell?
>
I'm pretty sure we've both heard of worse plans to conquer the world....

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.