Re: mailing list vs "the futur"
Michael Stone wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 12:28:35PM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
>>On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:37:48AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
>>>
>>> That bandwidth limit is not on your side of the isp, its the bandwidth
>>> from the main trunk lines to the isp. NNTP is a huge bandwidth hog
>>> regardless of how much of it your isp accepts for spooling on local disk
>>> to serve you.
>>>
>>
>>This is not the case.
>
> Yes it is. Most ISPs stopped supporting NNTP because of the ridiculous
> bandwidth (and disk space) demands.
I cant see *text* based NGs requiring nearly as much space (or
bandwidth) as modern (i.e. HTML-based) email. Now, if you're talking
about the "binary" groups, yeah, that's going to be a complete mess, and
I can see why they wouldn't want to carry those groups.
> Your rebuttal skipped over the part about people posting off-topic
> junk all over the place, and the fact that (the couple of cranks who
Don't see OT trash as any more painful than spam emails, not to mention
all the crap that people willingly sign up for.
> [...] A full newsfeed hit 1TB/day in the early 2000s, and most of the
> ISPs who were still trying to provide the service threw the towel in
> at that point. The costs were through the roof, the fraction of
> customers who used the service was miniscule, and almost nobody
> canceled because they turned off the news server.
I take it "a full newsfeed" includes those binary groups, huh? I mean,
E-S is only pushing an average of a few hundred MB/day -- BUT they only
carry the text groups.
> [...]
> There's a reason usenet is effectively dead. It was a great idea
> technically, on a "safe" network. It's completely incapable of dealing
> with abuse on the open internet.
Except it's still around, and still dealing with the open internet.
Sure, it's not very widely used, but if it couldn't deal with the
internet, it wouldn't exist at all.
Furthermore, it's not that the ~protocol~ is bad by any means, just that
the content is effectively worthless. I mean, given the proliferation
of spam, one could argue similarly against email.
> In theory you can still use an NNTP client (vs a server) to follow a
> limited number of text-only groups fairly efficiently. In practice
> there's just not that much left worth following because the experience
> got to be so bad, and because so few people are even aware it exists
> anymore. If you purchase newsgroup service as a standalone from a
> specialized company you typically get a somewhat more curated experience
> (for a pretty sizable fraction of the total price of your internet
> connection, to pay the costs outlined above). The reality is that the
> primary use of these services is downloading pirated software and other
> binaries.
No theory needed - it works perfectly well. There's enough still out
there that's worth reading; although I don't expect that NNTP will
necessarily stick around for the rest of my lifetime.
--
|_|O|_| Registered Linux user #585947
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281
Reply to: