On 2023-12-15 23:16:39 +0000, Wally J said:
>> I agree with OP, my service kinda sucks.
> Oh man. I am truly sorry for having said that.

But I want you to keep saying it sucks, until it stops sucking for you!
I honestly agree and I don't like it either.

> To me, the priority, as I see it, for the most good, is the search engine.

Uhm. I think I can do search. It should be the good search though, not
the old one, and it should be working with new content in real time.

I should have until the middle of February to set it up as it's not
really required before then, so I'll go as far as to say I feel
confident I will find the time to do it and to do it properly.

Davide Cavion wrote:

> Hey! I'm the guy behind Narkive.

Ahh! I though you were uncontactable ...

Could I request adding a few newish groups that I've been involved in
creating and which have reasonable traffic levels, but no archive due to
google no longer adding new groups?

alt.comp.os.windows-11
alt.comp.software.firefox
alt.comp.software.thunderbird
alt.comp.software.seamonkey

also alt.comp.os.windows-10, though I had no part in creating that.

> I removed the search functionality because it was broken more often
> than not and would lead to a bad user experience. I did almost finish a
> search redesign based around a cluster of servers running Vespa (which
> means ANN vector search + BM25, and would have been pretty much state of
> the art)

Using Howard Knight's lookup server we can find (most? many?) message
bodies given a message-id, but recently google has obfuscated
message-ids from their archive ... even a bare bones search that could
take a group name, and boolean search phrase and return a list of
message-ids would be handy ...

Am 15.12.2023 um 23:45:22 Uhr schrieb Davide Cavion:

> I could re-enable signups, posting

That would be good.
Is there any way in the software to enable kind of "first-post
moderation", like some web forums have, so spamming accounts could be
detected before they can post the first time.

candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> wrote:
>On 12/15/23 16:34, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> In article <nnd$47644239$56aff236@ed594a78d9328f17>,
>> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>>> Wally J wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In summary, there's utility for a web searchable read-only archive
>>>> that goes back to the olden days (if possible) which requires only
>>>> a browser.
>>>
>>> https://narkive.com/
>>
>> Again, it doesn't go back very far, that's the problem. This is great
>> for the future, but large chunks of the past have been lost for a while
>> due to google groups search brokenness, and they are going to be lost
>> even more completely.
>
>At the very least, a couple newsgroups (like rec.arts.comics.creative)
>have their own archives that go back pretty far:
>https://lists.eyrie.org/pipermail/racc/

Yes. talk.bizarre used to have one of those, but we packed the hard drive
up and shipped it to Dejanews. It was 1G of material so I am not sure
anyone was ever able to keep a backup of it.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Davide Cavion <loveshisspam@narkive.com> wrote:

> On 2023-12-15 23:16:39 +0000, Wally J said:
> >> I agree with OP, my service kinda sucks.
> > Oh man. I am truly sorry for having said that.
>
> But I want you to keep saying it sucks, until it stops sucking for you!
> I honestly agree and I don't like it either.
>
> > To me, the priority, as I see it, for the most good, is the search engine.
>
> Uhm. I think I can do search. It should be the good search though, not
> the old one, and it should be working with new content in real time.
>
> I should have until the middle of February to set it up as it's not
> really required before then, so I'll go as far as to say I feel
> confident I will find the time to do it and to do it properly.
>

That's very good to hear, Davide; thank you for your work on this
valuable resource. You might like to know that Narkive has been
mentioned in eternal-september.support. The subthread begins at:

Message-ID: <yd7clfxi2m.fsf@UBEblock.psr.com>
From: Winston <wbe@UBEBLOCK.psr.com.invalid>
Newsgroups: eternal-september.support
Subject: Re: Google Groups ending support for Usenet
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2023 16:38:09 -0500

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator
<snipeco.1@gmail.com>
Google to end Usenet gateway - My pet rock Gordon just cheered.
<https://support.google.com/groups/answer/11036538>

Hi all,

> Effective February 15, 2024, Google Groups will no longer support new
> Usenet content. Posting and subscribing will be disallowed, and new content
> from Usenet peers will not appear.

One could create gatewayed genuine Google groups (using dashes instead
of dots in the name of the group), and the show would go on, but I doubt
it would really be good for Usenet.
Let's encourage people to use better news clients and news servers :)

> Viewing and searching of historical data
> will still be supported as it is done today.

.... until Google announces they discontinue this service (and justifies
it in a few years because of broken searches and the fact that the
archives are not complete as they have stopped in 2024).

We should then ensure to keep several copies of historical data, as some
people here have already begun to do.
FWIW, https://olduse.net/ also has interesting historical data.

--
Julien ÉLIE

« Affirmanti incumbit probatio. »

Julien ÉLIE <iulius@nom-de-mon-site.com.invalid> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> > Effective February 15, 2024, Google Groups will no longer support new
> > Usenet content. Posting and subscribing will be disallowed, and new content
> > from Usenet peers will not appear.
>
> One could create gatewayed genuine Google groups (using dashes instead
> of dots in the name of the group), and the show would go on, but I doubt
> it would really be good for Usenet.
> Let's encourage people to use better news clients and news servers :)
>
> > Viewing and searching of historical data
> > will still be supported as it is done today.
>
> ... until Google announces they discontinue this service (and justifies
> it in a few years because of broken searches and the fact that the
> archives are not complete as they have stopped in 2024).
>
> We should then ensure to keep several copies of historical data, as some
> people here have already begun to do.
> FWIW, https://olduse.net/ also has interesting historical data.

Thanks for that! I've seen references to olduse.net before, but never
had a reason to look at it. Google's stunt of course changed that.

The <https://olduse.net/> page points to <https://article.olduse.net/>
which offers to "Look up old usenet articles by Message-ID".

And lo and behold I can lookup my February 24, 1989 article which I've
used as and example in these recent threads (No, to preserve my privacy
and those of others, I still won't give the URL.)

I like the CRT terminal like, low resolution, shades of yellow,
display in 'source' format! :-) Well done!

In article <ulkgae$1atim$2@news.trigofacile.com>,
Julien � LIE <iulius@nom-de-mon-site.com.invalid> wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>> Effective February 15, 2024, Google Groups will no longer support new
>> Usenet content. Posting and subscribing will be disallowed, and new content
>> from Usenet peers will not appear.
>
>One could create gatewayed genuine Google groups (using dashes instead
>of dots in the name of the group), and the show would go on, but I doubt
>it would really be good for Usenet.
>Let's encourage people to use better news clients and news servers :)
>

Yes!!

>
>> Viewing and searching of historical data
>> will still be supported as it is done today.
>
>... until Google announces they discontinue this service (and justifies
>it in a few years because of broken searches and the fact that the
>archives are not complete as they have stopped in 2024).
>
>We should then ensure to keep several copies of historical data, as some
>people here have already begun to do.
>FWIW, https://olduse.net/ also has interesting historical data.
>

Merci!

>--
>Julien ÉLIE
>
>« Affirmanti incumbit probatio. »

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
Merry Christmas 2023 and Happy New year 2024 Beware https://mindspring.com

In article <ulkn37.kpc.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>,
Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
>Julien �LIE <iulius@nom-de-mon-site.com.invalid> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> > Effective February 15, 2024, Google Groups will no longer support new
>> > Usenet content. Posting and subscribing will be disallowed, and
>new content
>> > from Usenet peers will not appear.
>>
>> One could create gatewayed genuine Google groups (using dashes instead
>> of dots in the name of the group), and the show would go on, but I doubt
>> it would really be good for Usenet.
>> Let's encourage people to use better news clients and news servers :)
>>
>> > Viewing and searching of historical data
>> > will still be supported as it is done today.
>>
>> ... until Google announces they discontinue this service (and justifies
>> it in a few years because of broken searches and the fact that the
>> archives are not complete as they have stopped in 2024).
>>
>> We should then ensure to keep several copies of historical data, as some
>> people here have already begun to do.
>> FWIW, https://olduse.net/ also has interesting historical data.
>
> Thanks for that! I've seen references to olduse.net before, but never
>had a reason to look at it. Google's stunt of course changed that.
>
> The <https://olduse.net/> page points to <https://article.olduse.net/>
>which offers to "Look up old usenet articles by Message-ID".
>
> And lo and behold I can lookup my February 24, 1989 article which I've
>used as and example in these recent threads (No, to preserve my privacy
>and those of others, I still won't give the URL.)
>
> I like the CRT terminal like, low resolution, shades of yellow,
>display in 'source' format! :-) Well done!

Google+ was better managed than Google Groups!
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
Merry Christmas 2023 and Happy New year 2024 Beware https://mindspring.com

On 12/16/23 06:16, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> wrote:
>> On 12/15/23 16:34, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>> In article <nnd$47644239$56aff236@ed594a78d9328f17>,
>>> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>>>> Wally J wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> In summary, there's utility for a web searchable read-only archive
>>>>> that goes back to the olden days (if possible) which requires only
>>>>> a browser.
>>>>
>>>> https://narkive.com/
>>>
>>> Again, it doesn't go back very far, that's the problem. This is great
>>> for the future, but large chunks of the past have been lost for a while
>>> due to google groups search brokenness, and they are going to be lost
>>> even more completely.
>>
>> At the very least, a couple newsgroups (like rec.arts.comics.creative)
>> have their own archives that go back pretty far:
>> https://lists.eyrie.org/pipermail/racc/
>
> Yes. talk.bizarre used to have one of those, but we packed the hard drive
> up and shipped it to Dejanews. It was 1G of material so I am not sure
> anyone was ever able to keep a backup of it.
> --scott
>

Shipped it? Like, the entire HDD?
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> writes:

> On 12/16/23 06:16, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> Yes. talk.bizarre used to have one of those, but we packed the hard
>> drive up and shipped it to Dejanews. It was 1G of material so I am
>> not sure anyone was ever able to keep a backup of it.
> Shipped it? Like, the entire HDD?

Back then, a gig was a *lot* to transfer over the wire - especially to a
remote site. Sending the physical drive was probably quicker, cheaper,
and more efficient.

candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> wrote:
>On 12/16/23 06:16, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> wrote:
>>> On 12/15/23 16:34, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>>> In article <nnd$47644239$56aff236@ed594a78d9328f17>,
>>>> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>>>>> Wally J wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In summary, there's utility for a web searchable read-only archive
>>>>>> that goes back to the olden days (if possible) which requires only
>>>>>> a browser.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://narkive.com/
>>>>
>>>> Again, it doesn't go back very far, that's the problem. This is great
>>>> for the future, but large chunks of the past have been lost for a while
>>>> due to google groups search brokenness, and they are going to be lost
>>>> even more completely.
>>>
>>> At the very least, a couple newsgroups (like rec.arts.comics.creative)
>>> have their own archives that go back pretty far:
>>> https://lists.eyrie.org/pipermail/racc/
>>
>> Yes. talk.bizarre used to have one of those, but we packed the hard drive
>> up and shipped it to Dejanews. It was 1G of material so I am not sure
>> anyone was ever able to keep a backup of it.
>
>Shipped it? Like, the entire HDD?

Yes. We didn't have any tape drive capable of tarring a whole 1GB up,
and it would have taken months to ftp it. So it was put in a box and
shipped to Deja and they had everything in their database within a few
weeks.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Marco Moock wrote:
> schrieb noel:
>> Marco Moock wrote:
>> > schrieb noel:
>> >> Marco Moock wrote:
>> >> > schrieb Julieta Shem:
>> >> >
>> >> >> We got to provide solutions our ourselves.
>> >> >
>> >> > Does anybody here want to host a web interface like rocksolid
>> >> > light?
>> >>
>> >> If you want web interfaces go run a forum.
>> >>
>> >> dnews has a web interface - I shut it down in the late 90's
>> >> because the more who found it abused it.
>> >
>> > There is no need to have a posting opportunity there.
>> > But those web interfaces make it possible to find content via
>> > regular search engines.
>> > Or do you know a Usenet search engine that can query NNTP servers?
>>
>> Why would you want the content archived outside of usenet, it
>> survived just fine back in the say before search engines
>
> Because there is a need to find information that has been posted months
> or years ago.
>
> That means that a search engine needs to be able to index it.
> I don't know any search engine that queries NNTP.

My server's private (for the time being). Article's aren't expired,
(except for ephemeral admin information). So my spool goes back
decades. And it turns out something along the lines of:

find . | xargs grep -l '@crcomp.net' | xargs grep 'braid'

reliably returns articles apparently lost by google along the way.

Danke,

--
Don, KB7RPU, https://www.qsl.net/kb7rpu
There was a young lady named Bright Whose speed was far faster than light;
She set out one day In a relative way And returned on the previous night.

Am 16.12.2023 um 19:56:34 Uhr schrieb Don:

> My server's private (for the time being). Article's aren't expired,
> (except for ephemeral admin information). So my spool goes back
> decades. And it turns out something along the lines of:

Would you like to make that archive public?

On 12/16/23 13:56, Don wrote:
> My server's private (for the time being). Article's aren't expired,
> (except for ephemeral admin information). So my spool goes back
> decades. And it turns out something along the lines of:
>
> find . | xargs grep -l '@crcomp.net' | xargs grep 'braid'

I occasionally do similar with my private news server.

Though, on spinning rust, it takes quite a while to walk the 20 or so
million articles that my server has.

> reliably returns articles apparently lost by google along the way.

Yep.

--
Grant. . . .

Marco Moock wrote:
> schrieb Don:
>
>> My server's private (for the time being). Article's aren't expired,
>> (except for ephemeral admin information). So my spool goes back
>> decades. And it turns out something along the lines of:
>
> Would you like to make that archive public?

It's tempting. Although it's probably not doable - given google's
failure, despite the enormous resources available at its disposal.
Nonetheless, there's a silver lining. archive hosts a ton of
articles available to the public:

https://archive.org/details/usenet

Danke,

--
Don, KB7RPU, https://www.qsl.net/kb7rpu
There was a young lady named Bright Whose speed was far faster than light;
She set out one day In a relative way And returned on the previous night.

On 12/16/23 13:59, Marco Moock wrote:
> Would you like to make that archive public?

I won't make my private server public.

But I will provide point-in-time copies of it's spool to people
generating an archive if they want it.

I should have a snapshot or another copy of my spool from within the
last year that still has messages posted from Google Groups. -- I've
gone through and removed them from my private server for ${REASONS}.

If you want a copy, email me directly and we can work something out.

I doubt that my ~5 years is worth uploading to archive.org. I fully
expect that someone else's archive supersedes mine.

--
Grant. . . .

Grant Taylor wrote:
> Don wrote:
>>
>> My server's private (for the time being). Article's aren't expired,
>> (except for ephemeral admin information). So my spool goes back
>> decades. And it turns out something along the lines of:
>>
>> find . | xargs grep -l '@crcomp.net' | xargs grep 'braid'
>
> I occasionally do similar with my private news server.
>
> Though, on spinning rust, it takes quite a while to walk the 20 or so
> million articles that my server has.

Retrieval speed's proportional to pipeline protractedness - the more
unix pipes, the slower it goes. Nonetheless, it does return results in a
reasonably short period.
A proto-aphorism's been floating around in my mind for a while now.
Something along the lines of "information quality is proportional
to the length of time spent waiting for it."
For instance, an answer to a question posted on a maillist may take
a day or two to arrive. And the quality of the answer more than makes
the wait worthwhile.
OTOH the Western world loves, and pays for, instant gratification,
regardless of quality.

Danke,

--
Don, KB7RPU, https://www.qsl.net/kb7rpu
There was a young lady named Bright Whose speed was far faster than light;
She set out one day In a relative way And returned on the previous night.

In article <20231216b@crcomp.net>, Don <g@crcomp.net> wrote:
>
>My server's private (for the time being). Article's aren't expired,
>(except for ephemeral admin information). So my spool goes back
>decades. And it turns out something along the lines of:

How many decades? Does it predate the Renaming? If it goes back before
1990, would it be possible for me to get access to parts of it?
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Scott Dorsey wrote:
> Don wrote:
>>
>>My server's private (for the time being). Article's aren't expired,
>>(except for ephemeral admin information). So my spool goes back
>>decades. And it turns out something along the lines of:
>
> How many decades? Does it predate the Renaming? If it goes back before
> 1990, would it be possible for me to get access to parts of it?

AFAIK, articles only date back to approximately the year 2000. Other
people's spool archives available at <https://archive.org/details/usenet>,
as well as commercial content, was haphazardly imported many years
ago.
Since then, archive.org added a lot of new backups of old content.
It makes me want to re-build from scratch. Unfortunately, it takes months
to process tens/hundreds of millions of text files, one group at a time.
The hardest importation task is to sort things by Date: to ensure
the Xref: article number increases monotonically with Date:
Long story short, you probably won't get much mileage out of my spool
"as is." Any re-built spool is a different story.

Danke,

--
Don, KB7RPU, https://www.qsl.net/kb7rpu
There was a young lady named Bright Whose speed was far faster than light;
She set out one day In a relative way And returned on the previous night.

On Dec 16, 2023 at 3:13:17 PM CST, "Scott Dorsey" <Scott Dorsey> wrote:

> In article <20231216b@crcomp.net>, Don <g@crcomp.net> wrote:
>>
>> My server's private (for the time being). Article's aren't expired,
>> (except for ephemeral admin information). So my spool goes back
>> decades. And it turns out something along the lines of:
>
> How many decades? Does it predate the Renaming? If it goes back before
> 1990, would it be possible for me to get access to parts of it?
> --scott

Thanks to another news admin who did the hard work, I was able to bring in the
net.* archives that predate the Great Renaming. I'm still working on archives
from the 90s.

Anyone is welcome to check out what I have on news.blueworldhosting.com
(https://usenet.blueworldhosting.com for more details).

In article <20231216c@crcomp.net>, Don <g@crcomp.net> wrote:
>Marco Moock wrote:
>> schrieb Don:
>>
>>> My server's private (for the time being). Article's aren't expired,
>>> (except for ephemeral admin information). So my spool goes back
>>> decades. And it turns out something along the lines of:
>>
>> Would you like to make that archive public?
>
>It's tempting. Although it's probably not doable - given google's
>failure, despite the enormous resources available at its disposal.
> Nonetheless, there's a silver lining. archive hosts a ton of
>articles available to the public:
>
> https://archive.org/details/usenet
>
>Danke,
>
>--
>Don, KB7RPU, https://www.qsl.net/kb7rpu
>There was a young lady named Bright Whose speed was far faster than light;
>She set out one day In a relative way And returned on the previous night.
>

Ya!!
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
Merry Christmas 2023 and Happy New year 2024 Beware https://mindspring.com

On Sat, 16 Dec 2023 22:44:14 -0000 (UTC), "Don" <g@crcomp.net> wrote:
>Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> Don wrote:
>>>My server's private (for the time being). Article's aren't expired,
>>>(except for ephemeral admin information). So my spool goes back
>>>decades. And it turns out something along the lines of:
>>
>> How many decades? Does it predate the Renaming? If it goes back before
>> 1990, would it be possible for me to get access to parts of it?
>
>AFAIK, articles only date back to approximately the year 2000. Other
>people's spool archives available at <https://archive.org/details/usenet>,
>as well as commercial content, was haphazardly imported many years
>ago.
> Since then, archive.org added a lot of new backups of old content.
>It makes me want to re-build from scratch. Unfortunately, it takes months
>to process tens/hundreds of millions of text files, one group at a time.
> The hardest importation task is to sort things by Date: to ensure
>the Xref: article number increases monotonically with Date:
> Long story short, you probably won't get much mileage out of my spool
>"as is." Any re-built spool is a different story.
>Danke,

testing . . .
https://usenet.blueworldhosting.com/
>Accessing the Usenet service:
>Configure your news client to connect to news.blueworldhosting.com.
>(usenet.blueworldhosting.com is used for peering and this website only)
>Connections are available on port 119 and 563. Port 119 is unencrypted and 563
>is encrypted with TLS. We recommend using TLS.

i'm using Omnimix w/Tor Browser, port 563, implicit ssl, socks version 5
(client 40tude Dialog); seems fast with amazingly long article retention!

On 12/16/23 12:24, Tom Furie wrote:
> candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> writes:
>
>> On 12/16/23 06:16, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>> Yes. talk.bizarre used to have one of those, but we packed the hard
>>> drive up and shipped it to Dejanews. It was 1G of material so I am
>>> not sure anyone was ever able to keep a backup of it.
>> Shipped it? Like, the entire HDD?
>
> Back then, a gig was a *lot* to transfer over the wire - especially to a
> remote site. Sending the physical drive was probably quicker, cheaper,
> and more efficient.

Neat.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On Fri, 15 Dec 2023 11:04:52 -0300, Julieta Shem wrote:

> noel <deletethis@invalid.lan> writes:
>
> [...]
>
>> Why would you want the content archived outside of usenet, it survived
>> just fine back in the say before search engines
>
> That's an interesting point. It is perhaps a good idea not to display
> anything on the web precisely so that we do not attract people with an
> interest in seeing information displayed to a world such as the web. For
> instance, if we display something on the web, the system might be of
> interest to spammers.
>
> Maybe we should keep the USENET as hidden from the world as possible.
> This closedness might actually work as an invitation. The value of the
> USENET is the value of the people in it. If we only invite technical
> people, for instance, the USENET becomes attractive to whose interested
> in such properties.

If people want to find stuff on usenet (what stuff god not even knows
since its 90% trolls these days) of an interested topic they look for
that group and search that group (just like mailing lists, you find the
outlet that feeds your need), we don't need search engines, what are they
going to archive... trolls, warez pups, spam? Google might finally be
pissing off but the 'ol certain wrist attire spam was doing the rounds
for years, I think deja even gave up trying to exclude them back in the
day.

Ohhh and for Marco, if your next excuse is short retention, then find a
better server ;)