So do we.
https://rootbadger.com
So do we.
https://rootbadger.com
On 2026-07-25, Tom Mix wrote:Same, Nuno.
So do we.
https://rootbadger.com
Given the amount of times this is being advertised here, that's about to cross a threshold of me never looking into it because it's being
advertised as if this were a TV commercial spot :-P
On 2026-07-25, Tom Mix wrote:
So do we.
https://rootbadger.com
Given the amount of times this is being advertised here, that's about to cross a threshold of me never looking into it because it's being
advertised as if this were a TV commercial spot :-P
Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> writes:
On 2026-07-25, Tom Mix wrote:
So do we.
https://rootbadger.com
Given the amount of times this is being advertised here, that's about to
cross a threshold of me never looking into it because it's being
advertised as if this were a TV commercial spot :-P
Same, Nuno.
I saw Lisp Club on a post header of your article. Are you discussingThank you for informing me that you have noticed.
Lisp anywhere on the USENET or anywhere else on the Internet? Please
share?
Just another centralized message board among hundreds (thousands?) that already exist. The novelty is the usenet-like group hierarchy otherwise
it looks just like Digg (RIP), Reddit, Lemmy and others.
If I've learned anything over the last 20+ years of modern social media
it's that they either collapse or live long enough to sell your data.
Usenet, the original social media platform, has been around since long
before most Silicon Valley social media founders were born and it will
remain long after they're gone.
I'll stick to the original, warts and all.
On 2026-07-25, Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 2026-07-25, Tom Mix wrote:
Just another centralized message board among hundreds (thousands?) that already exist. The novelty is the usenet-like group hierarchy otherwise
it looks just like Digg (RIP), Reddit, Lemmy and others.
If I've learned anything over the last 20+ years of modern social media
it's that they either collapse or live long enough to sell your data.
Usenet, the original social media platform, has been around since long
before most Silicon Valley social media founders were born and it will
remain long after they're gone.
I'll stick to the original, warts and all.
Just another centralized message board among hundreds (thousands?) that >already exist. The novelty is the usenet-like group hierarchy otherwise
it looks just like Digg (RIP), Reddit, Lemmy and others.
On 2026-07-25, Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 2026-07-25, Tom Mix wrote:
So do we.
https://rootbadger.com
Given the amount of times this is being advertised here, that's about to
cross a threshold of me never looking into it because it's being
advertised as if this were a TV commercial spot :-P
Just another centralized message board among hundreds (thousands?) that already exist. The novelty is the usenet-like group hierarchy otherwise
it looks just like Digg (RIP), Reddit, Lemmy and others.
If I've learned anything over the last 20+ years of modern social media
it's that they either collapse or live long enough to sell your data.
Usenet, the original social media platform, has been around since long
before most Silicon Valley social media founders were born and it will
remain long after they're gone.
I'll stick to the original, warts and all.
On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 01:02:25 -0000 (UTC), Ted W. wrote:
On 2026-07-25, Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 2026-07-25, Tom Mix wrote:
Just another centralized message board among hundreds (thousands?) that
already exist. The novelty is the usenet-like group hierarchy otherwise
it looks just like Digg (RIP), Reddit, Lemmy and others.
If I've learned anything over the last 20+ years of modern social media
it's that they either collapse or live long enough to sell your data.
Usenet, the original social media platform, has been around since long
before most Silicon Valley social media founders were born and it will
remain long after they're gone.
I'll stick to the original, warts and all.
There is also something to say about just the simplicity. I have run a
lemmy instance and still find it frustrating that you have to use web browsers to utilize the platform. KISS really applies here in that we already have protocol standards for discussions and minimal clients with minimal network connectivity required.
Multimedia is rather over-emphasized on popular disccussion platforms and
is better served on their own dedicated platforms for their binary types.
As a side note, I would prefer its own protocol for the different types of media to be consumed (as with NNTP for mainly textual discussion) however, it's a far fetched and not well thought out idea of mine that I wouldn't expect to see ever happening in the wild at any great scale.
Can you elaborate on your idea? It seems you're saying that instead of
using the web, a social network should implement its own multimedia
protocol? If so, I'd side with you---I agree with the web isn't a very
good user interface and I also don't know how we could turn a multimedia protocol into a good user interface. When I think of good user
interface, I always think of text user interfaces, like the one we
already have.
Why is that so? I believe computers are not too different from what
they were in the 70s. We're still using the same software pretty much.
(Not saying everything is perfect.)
On 2026-07-29, Anton Antimo <anton@safunu.org> wrote:
Can you elaborate on your idea? It seems you're saying that instead of
using the web, a social network should implement its own multimedia
protocol? If so, I'd side with you---I agree with the web isn't a very
good user interface and I also don't know how we could turn a multimedia
protocol into a good user interface. When I think of good user
interface, I always think of text user interfaces, like the one we
already have.
Me too - but we're a small minority.
Why is that so? I believe computers are not too different from what
they were in the 70s. We're still using the same software pretty much.
(Not saying everything is perfect.)
I agree that the lower layers might not have changed much.
But they're buried under layer after layer of gooey bloatware.
Yes. Not being the smart way to use computers, it can't be the future.
For years I've expected the web to somehow die precisely because of the
way browsers have been evolving. Complex software is bound to die
because of the lack of diversity. Look how very few browsers we have.
Why is that? Because only very rich corporations can build it. And
maybe now we have a glimpse of the downfall of the web. The so-called
smart systems producing slop and bots perhaps being responsible for most
of the web traffic. Maybe that's indeed the end of the web. Rebirth.
I still think the web as its idealized conception is something we want.
Just like the USENET is something we want.
Verily, in article <875x1xa9t7.fsf@safunu.org>, did anton@safunu.org
deliver unto us this message:
Yes. Not being the smart way to use computers, it can't be the future.
For years I've expected the web to somehow die precisely because of the
way browsers have been evolving. Complex software is bound to die
because of the lack of diversity. Look how very few browsers we have.
Why is that? Because only very rich corporations can build it. And
maybe now we have a glimpse of the downfall of the web. The so-called
smart systems producing slop and bots perhaps being responsible for most
of the web traffic. Maybe that's indeed the end of the web. Rebirth.
I still think the web as its idealized conception is something we want.
Just like the USENET is something we want.
This is an interesting discussion.
Perhaps hypertext and document organization should never have been
combined. I recently rediscovered gopherspace, and to my surprise it's
not completely dead.
The current web dissatisfies thinking people. Something else is bound to arise. Maybe it'll be a gopherspace revival or maybe a new thing, but
the web just isn't cutting it these days.
We never should have let the corporatins sieze control of everything,
but we didn't know what to do.
I wonder if they
know that the USENET is peaceful once again.
What I believe is that they just don't want to come back because perhaps
the USENET is just not disruption-free guaranteed. Perhaps we think now
we need to really have semi-open groups such as a mailing list or a
private NNTP server. For example, the Linux kernel people seem to
prefer a mailing list (for posting) because this way they easily ban any misbehaving member and keep the newbies at bay.
So that's another question I ask. Is the USENET model the adequate one
for an Internet-populous world? Maybe we should begin a new network of interlinked private NNTP servers. It doesn't seem that a high-volume
NNTP group is interesting anyway; that usually means a too high
noise/content ratio.
We never should have let the corporatins sieze control of everything,
but we didn't know what to do.
Can you elaborate on your idea? It seems you're saying that instead of
using the web, a social network should implement its own multimedia
protocol? If so, I'd side with you---I agree with the web isn't a very
good user interface and I also don't know how we could turn a multimedia protocol into a good user interface. When I think of good user
interface, I always think of text user interfaces, like the one we
already have.
Why is that so? I believe computers are not too different from what
they were in the 70s. We're still using the same software pretty much.
(Not saying everything is perfect.)
NNTP is the API for UsenetThis is incorrect. NNTP is Network News Transfer Protocol, is not an
We never should have let the corporatins sieze control of everything,They didn't. People handed them control. People want a curated, safe,
but we didn't know what to do.
Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
NNTP is the API for UsenetThis is incorrect. NNTP is Network News Transfer Protocol,
is not an
API, and isn't technically needed to use usenet. Before NNTP, UUCP
shuffled articles along. Two systems peered via UUCP over a serial/modem
link can pass along articles.
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.comNOSPAM> writes:
We never should have let the corporatins sieze control of everything,They didn't. People handed them control. People want a curated, safe,
but we didn't know what to do.
walled garden consisting of only the pleasant things they want to
see, not a wild forest full of animals, danger, and trees that they have
to cut down to build a cabin out of. People, most of them, willingly
gave up their freedom and agency of will for convenience.
jayjwa wrote to alt.folklore.computers <=-
They didn't. People handed them control. People want a curated, safe, walled garden consisting of only the pleasant things they want to
see, not a wild forest full of animals, danger, and trees that they
have to cut down to build a cabin out of. People, most of them,
willingly gave up their freedom and agency of will for convenience.
| Sysop: | Jacob Catayoc |
|---|---|
| Location: | Pasay City, Metro Manila, Philippines |
| Users: | 4 |
| Nodes: | 4 (0 / 4) |
| Uptime: | 496009:11:03 |
| Calls: | 178 |
| Files: | 605 |
| D/L today: |
22 files (18,741K bytes) |
| Messages: | 70,152 |