Why can't we just "reset" Usenet? | Hacker News Reader

Why can't we just "reset" Usenet?

6 pointsquilnux9 comments

Usenet, having been around for several decades now has gotten to the point where you can't just host your own server. While I get the reason behind that, why is not a good idea, to perhaps split away from the current dataset and start a new feed of Usenet servers without the older data and without binaries? The current Usenet would still be present, but it would allow for people not only to go back to self-hosting Usenet, but would also get rid of some of the "junk" that people don't want. And removing binaries from the new one, doesn't stop people from using the old Usenet to continue doing so.

Why would this be a bad idea?

View on HN

I use Usenet.

But I don't feel an extra server would add anything that current ones don't have. On the other hand, an extra server is a backup in case one of the current servers falls off the Net.

Today we have http and ftp to obtain binaries, and quite large ones at that. The need for binary Usenet newsgroups is pretty much obsolete.

What Usenet could do with is more 'advertising'. Not 'advertising ON Usenet' but 'advertising ABOUT Usenet'. Many people just do not know that Usenet exists.

I have often said that Reddit is 'The New Usenet' because its layout and threading is very similar. Having said that, my preference is that Reddit can FOAD.

So efforts would be better served in training materials and perhaps software (clients and such) that is easier to use then what is current present today. Am I taking your response correctly?

I don't think training materials would be necessary. YMMV. Most people get and appreciate the threading model.

Clients could be improved, I guess. Myself, I use a self-improved version of Tass that I originally got with a copy of Coherent (a UNIX Version 7 clone) around 1991. It uses an ncurses 'gui' which I admit I have thought of upgrading from time to time so that it uses a real GUI such as GTK.

However it works well enough, and though I suppose it could do with improving, it works well enough that I can't be bothered spending the time to debug/rewrite it.

My main thrust is that most people have never heard of Usenet and what it is capable of.

I might look into a few clients and see if I can't contribute to make them better. I also prefer a TUI/CLI client. I don't use X11 very often personally.

My biggest consideration for Usenet (and one of the arguments that's been made against it when I've talked to people) is people aren't willing to pay for it. That was the reason I decided to ask the question about maybe doing a reset that would allow for the feed to start over to where people could host their own with minimal storage requirements. The current Usenet continuing for those who wanted it, and the newer one for those who want to either host their own, or use a friend's host or something.

So what is the best way to overcome the "I don't want to pay for it" argument when trying to sell people on the idea of using Usenet?

So what is the best way to overcome the "I don't want to pay for it" argument when trying to sell people on the idea of using Usenet?

Ah, but people are paying for it. They pay with their time and interest in the subject-matter. Their time has value. Their knowledge has value.

This "paying for it" mentality has arisen with the commercial takeover of the Internet. Back when the Internet was young, there was a completely different mentality. It was a 'How can I help the next Man?' mentality. It was quite literally an 'open-source' mentality, and that was because the early Internet was not the domain of the commercial interests, but the domain of the universities and other centres of advanced learning.

My earliest leafnode of Usenet was as an offshoot of the Adelaide University in South Australia. I was part of a UUCP 'store and forward' sub-network. I remember the excitement around 1991 or so when the buzz was that there were now a million nodes on the Internet(!).

I also prefer a TUI/CLI client.

When you're using pure text 99.9% of the time, you might as well use a text-based client. If you have a 'Desktop GUI' you merely run that text-based client in an xterm.

It sort of worked when there were expectations to stay on topic, but at this point a revamped Usenet would need to draw users away from brand-safe social media feeds curated with machine learning funded by advertising.

Yeah, there's nothing stopping you from running an NNTP server. Gmane used to have an NNTP gateway that wasn't part of Usenet.

I guess what I mean is, there is a lot of things that Usenet does because back in the 90's we didn't have a lot of the technology we have today. Today there are more solutions then there was which means Usenet doesn't need to be the host for things like binaries, and the like, which tend to be most of the storage consumption problems that would keep people from self-hosting on the existing network. If we started over, not utilizing binary storage and a few other things, would that not make Usenet a better service with less storage requirements? Or am I just missing it completely?

If we started over, not utilizing binary storage

Not sure if this is what you mean, but there are several news servers that only pull the non binary group feeds. Some of them are free. As simonblack mentioned, there would just need to be a significant effort to show people how easy it is to use them. This would include how to filter out spam, or filter in known-good people and content.

As wmf mentioned, you can also host your own node (leafnode or hamster). I have not run them. What limits you put on the server would be up to you and who you replicate to/from would be up to you much in the same high level concept IRC servers can be interconnected assuming the admins of each set of servers agree with each others policies.

Why would this be a bad idea?

As with self hosting any software there is the matter of having a documented policy on acceptable use, how you will remediate illegal material, handle abuse complaints, etc... It is not something that can be set and forgotten about. As to whether or not that is a bad idea depends on how much free time and patience you have. The people you replicate from would have to have to perform the same due diligence as you. So basically the same issues as running chat, forum, wiki, fediverse, shared email, chan and other servers. Running any of these things requires the cognitive fortitude, lack of bias, patience, ability to deal with challenging people and so on. In other words, what dang and team do here 24/7/365.

There is some additional information here [1] on running your own news servers.

[1] - https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Usenet#How_do_I_run_a_local_Use...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com