ISPs, Newsgroups, etc. ...OH MY!!!

[Billy Crook]

Flawed comparison.  The size of an address space is an integer which
can only grow as time goes on.  Individual network protocols become
obsolete as new ones supersede the functions of the old.  It's called
progress.  Usenet has tangible and irreconcilable flaws.  That is why
it was retired, and replaced with what is commonly referred to as "the
web", http and https.  In the coming years, as 'cloud computing'
happens, people won't have "computers".  They will have browsers.
(Even if their browser "came with" an OS, and some shiny hardware.)

Several thousand people doesn't sound like all that large a number in
contrast to 'everyone else', most of whom have never heard of usenet.

Web-based message forums, or email lists are a replacement.  They
don't "drop in".  They're different.  Things change.  Get over it.
How the entire world is obligated to stop in its tracks because of the
inabilities of the blind is beyond reason.  It's unfair that the blind
can't drive cars, but they shouldn't be allowed to either.  Cell
phones are bad enough.  Sight is simply a requisite of a lot of
things.

I'm don't think usenet should go away, and I don't think an ISP should
just stop providing services without compensation.  That said, you
don't need broadband to use google groups, or phpBB.  That assertion
is false.  You can EASILY turn graphics, scripting, and flash off if
you'd prefer not to load them for some reason.  While it's taken
forever for broadband to get where it is today, and America's
broadband is still some of the worst in the world, it will only get
faster and cheaper as time goes on.  Claiming dialup is cheaper is
like saving money by buying a dollar of gasoline at a time.  You get a
much better price with broadband.

For what it's worth, anywhere in the Kansas City area you can get Road
Runner cable broadband, you can also get Earthlink, AOL, and what used
to be planetKC.  There may be other options as well.  Time Warner
pulling their own usenet plug likely would not affect the competition.
 If you use usenet, you can speak with your wallet, and switch service
providers.  And gee, you shouldn't need broadband if you just use the
text only groups, and no images or flash.

I propose that the members of this mailing list are probably more
likely than any other group to actually use usenet, and so propose we
take a tally.  Do you use usenet:
More often than once a year and
via a usenet client and server and
for something other than pornography and
for something other than piracy.

I bet that even though the numbers will be skewed in favor of usenet
given the audience, it will STILL be obvious that usenet is rarely
used.

I will start the poll off putting myself in the NO column, and you in
the YES column:

As of 2008-06-29 04:55:
YES:1
NO:1

On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 00:51, Leo Mauler <webgiant at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- On Sat, 6/28/08, Jeffrey Watts <jeffrey.w.watts at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> A few legitimate folks still use USENET, but let's be honest
>> here - it's been 8 years or so since it was relevant.
>
> Which is a statement about as accurate as "640k is enough for anybody."  Usenet may not have been relevant to *you* for eight years, but many thousands of people use the text-only portion of Usenet.
>
> It's the last kind of text-only message board on the Internet, and if you say that web-based message forums are a drop-in replacement then you've clearly never used (or supported a user of) a screen reader for the blind.
>
>> If you're going to pick a cause to fight for, it
>> shouldn't be to save USENET, especially since I doubt
>> many of you here actually use it any more (unless you're
>> looking for porn, but then again most of those folks have
>> moved to Torrents).
>
> I'm sure the rich and vibrant community on rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated would be somewhat insulted to discover that we're just there for the "porn" (right now we're mostly there for the current "Battlestar Galactica" discussions, and the fact that JMS and other SciFi writers pop in from time to time).  I've seen web message boards which would be happy for 100 new interesting (the key word is "interesting") messages a week, but rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated gets over 600 a month.
>
> The fact is that Usenet thrives (among people who may not even know about the alt.binaries.* hierarchy) precisely because it is text-only.  Not everyone wants to have to upgrade to broadband just to discuss stuff on a graphics-intensive and Flash-intensive web-based message board.  If you leave out the alt.binaries.* hierarchy there's still a lot of active text-only Usenet left over, which many thousands of people still use on a regular basis.