For an archive this is a big no-no. Respect the source material!
Otherwise, thank you for the time spent doing this.
Though I'm also curious, that's perhaps not the tone I would have used when asking. After all, better a censored archive than no archive.
I'm just speculating, but it may be the policy of usenetarchives.com, in order to accept their upload.
Censoring seems to be done around email addresses, names, and offensive words. Perhaps, this is done to reduce the chances of people later asking for the posts to be taken down entirely.
For example, I believe the takedown by Google of comp.lang.lisp and comp.lang.forth commented elsewhere was done because there was offensive content present. The Google support request that mentioned that reason was taken down, but it's what I remember.
"Getting good FP performance from a micro seems to require pipelining. Keeping the p<asterisk><asterisk>e(s) full seems to require a certain amount of parallelism and regularity."
https://www.usenetarchives.com/view.php?id=comp.arch&g=14965...
Edit: Ah, the irony. HN markdown causes two consecutive asterisks to disappear.
Actually, it's not that obvious. It censored "Dirty Sanchez". I'm thinking it thought it was a person's name, and censored it for privacy reasons?
> Keeping the p<asterisk><asterisk>e(s) full seems to
I suppose "pipe" can have an offensive/sexual connotation. Even if it doesn't so much today, perhaps it did back then.
(It isn’t: while “knob” can be translated as “Knopf”, the latter doesn’t have the anatomical meanings of the former).
A code block.
Two asterisks follow: **
This normally would be *italicised*.Its not a bad idea to filter content though, and/or have a flag button on threads/posts. 300 million articles from 40 years of an obscure and anarchic corner of the internet are bound to contain posts that are either potentially illegal or which you otherwise don't necessarily want to be publishing.
Also, it seems that your parsing process strips headers and that you don't keep the raw messages, however I remember that on some newsgroups people used to pass secret messages in headers that only those "in the know" would look for, it would be a shame to lose that. Access to posts in raw format would be nice in this scenario.
> On Oct 13, 11:36 am, "Colin" <Co...@DirtySanchez.b••t> wrote:
Did you find additional utzoo material beyond what was already on archive.org in tarballs?
I do have one question. Those tapes...how old were they? Were they contemporary to the postings? (bonus question: if so wow, but under what justification?. tapes were expensive right and nobody valued archiving at the time (except maybe this guy)?) this individual you got the tapes from meticulously copy onto new media and all the overhead that entails?
Today I make personal backups of things I want to keep, whether local files or web snippets and burn 'em to a DVD , blu-ray, or optical disk of some kind with the justification of 'can't ransomware WORM media'.
However, I don't do the internet archiving guru stuff of '3 copies, 2 mediums, 1 routine' (or something like that) so in a sense my backups are cruising for a bruising in the case that optical disks could go bad, hard drives could die (these I do migrate to new media when I get around to it, CDs I just read and burn to a fresh one), house could burn down, etc.
Partially looking to see if I can get justification for my backup slovenliness ;)
It would take some engineering: I might store each optical disk image as a compressed image file, for example (zstd would be good for the large amount of data), to avoid metadata charges. Fun to think about.
I've frankly never trusted them as a steward for this and I'm glad to see someone stepping in.
Do you have any plans to team up with the Internet Archive on this?
It’s sadly not good enough.
How do you handle cross posting?
On one hand it’s nice that we can see all this old data. On the other hand, as far as I remember in the 90s you typically subscribed to a newsgroup and only then got recent posts. So the expectations was a limited life time of the post. Of course it would still be stored in thousands of readers.
Obviously the copyright of each post is with the author. You just assume that you have a right to redistribute.
I’m also happy if I get a pointer elsewhere if you have an url.
Probably by not being European.
Europe doesn't make laws for the whole world anymore. Colonialism is dead.
Fatal error: Uncaught Error: Call to a member function real_escape_string() on null in /var/www/html/usenetarchives.com/3.vars.php:80 Stack trace: #0 /var/www/html/usenetarchives.com/1.header.php(190): include() #1 /var/www/html/usenetarchives.com/view.php(22): include_once('/var/www/html/u...') #2 {main} thrown in /var/www/html/usenetarchives.com/3.vars.php on line 80
Pretty consistently.
As it exists right now, there are some glaring omissions. I would imagine that showing authors in the search results next to the titles would not be prohibitively difficult.
Proper threading of posts would probably be considerably harder, but would provide immense value IMHO.
DMCA took this incredible resource off line. Please don’t let this happen again, as even archive.org found it easier to destroy it all than to fight Marty.
Plus it allows all us little people build fun things with it, like my altavista based search of utzoo:
altavista.superglobalmegacorp.com
Thanks
Edit: I am now on a desktop, and confirm it's not a mobile glitch; the archives for comp.os.linux are imported back to 2003 only at this time. https://www.usenetarchives.com/threads.php?id=comp.os.linux&...