The beauty of Usenet was real! Newsgroups covered everything in Big 7, if it was not enough reading then alt.* was a substantial addition. Still not enough? then gnu.*, fidonet.* and etc.
The one fact is very interesting the communication was very compact, condensed with huge attentions to details. People thought twice before saying something. It was real thoughtful communication [sometime it had with blames and flames]... Back to the topic of condensed, I compared the size ratio of article is distributed by Usenet News and the representation of the same article in google.groups and here it is the fascinating results
$ wc -wc DOM\ Source\ of\ Selection.html usenet.txt
9764 328244 DOM Source of Selection.html
540 3659 usenet.txt
The modern delivery is almost 100 times heavier! Does it deliver a better experience in UX? I'm not sure. You can compare by yourself and decide, the subject of article is "A Modest Proposal"
The google-one is here:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/net.movies.sw/FQb1ch6nh4E/lKl_fynjW4sJ
The Usenet original is in-line:
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 (MC830713); site klipper.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsrgv!garfield!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!mcvax!vu44!botter!klipper!biep
From: biep@klipper.UUCP (J. A. "Biep" Durieux)
Newsgroups: net.movies,net.movies.sw,net.sf-lovers,net.flame,net.news
Subject: Re:
Message-ID: <401@klipper.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 2-Jan-85 15:57:13 EST
Article-I.D.: klipper.401
Posted: Wed Jan 2 15:57:13 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 3-Jan-85 14:42:44 EST
References: <2481@ucla-cs.ARPA> <1605@drutx.UUCP> <383@hou2e.UUCP> <393@klipper.UUCP> <24@epsilon.UUCP> <6719@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Organization: VU Informatica, Amsterdam
Lines: 80
In article <6719@brl-tgr.ARPA>,
geo...@brl-tgr.ARPA (Geoffrey Sauerborn (TANK) <geoffs>) writes:
>In article <24@epsilon.UUCP> you write:
>>In article <393@klipper.UUCP> biep writes:
>>>>> From: schu@drutx.UUCP (SchulteSM)
>>>>> Subject: Re: A Modest Proposal
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> q
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> w
>>>>> .
>>>>> dfslkfl;
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> lkfdg
>>>>> ;lfdkg;lka;dlgk
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ZZ
>>>>> agkfjlkadfgkj
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Yes, I agree. This is definately a proposal worth considering.
>>>>
>>>
>>>No, no, no!!!
>>>I know, it sounds nice, but believe me, it just doesn't work.
>>>Someone over here brought this up on our local network, and we've
>>>been discussing it over and again, and indeed, it sounds appealing,
>>>but when you work out the details you'll find lots of inconsistencies
>>>and problems. Don't try to reinvent the wheel, there are already
>>>enough other proposals on this net which ask for our attention.
>>>
>>Well, we've actually done it here, and it works out just fine. Of course,
>>we had to make certain minor changes like "DfXlkfl;:" instead of
>>"dfslkfl;" as was indicated in the original article. You'll note that
>>otherwise a contradiction arises when "ZZ" is implemented.
>>
>> Ed Sheppard
>> Bell Communications Research
>
>
> Alright! I'm sick of this! Why is it that every time someone
>puts a good piece into public domain, somebody has to good and change
>the source! The next thing to happen it some BO-ZO will try to use
>this changed version without taking the time to read the documentation -
>and naturally the FOOL starts flaming to the original poster!!!!
>
>
> Geoff Sauerborn
You all don't seem to get the point. Indeed, Ed, it is possible
to adapt the thing to your local network, when all machines are compa-
tible, none is running notesfiles, all are little-endian, and at least
some of them are not feeding news to decvax, mcvax or purdue (and per-
haps others, I've not yet got time to find out), and some other little
things. *But not all sites of USENET do!!!* And what is happening then
is that everybody starts making his local patches, and we end up even
worse than we started. The whole mistake is due to the starting "q",
which supposes a local "edsgr w534cb67835", since otherwise indeed "ZZ"
goes wrong in boundary cases.
I must say I do not yet completely understand Ed's patch, it
occurs to me that this only works because of some local changes to the
rot13 algorithm. That can hardly be called "portable", can it?
Geoff, I think your argument goes wrong at the word "good".
I would say: quit the idea, the gains for sf-movie-lovers do
not outweigh the burden for the rest of us.
--
Biep.
{seismo|decvax|philabs}!mcvax!vu44!botter!klipper!biep
I utterly disagree with everything you are saying, but I
am prepared to fight to the death for your right to say it.
--Voltaire
The one fact is very interesting the communication was very compact, condensed with huge attentions to details. People thought twice before saying something. It was real thoughtful communication [sometime it had with blames and flames]... Back to the topic of condensed, I compared the size ratio of article is distributed by Usenet News and the representation of the same article in google.groups and here it is the fascinating results
$ wc -wc DOM\ Source\ of\ Selection.html usenet.txt
9764 328244 DOM Source of Selection.html
540 3659 usenet.txt
The modern delivery is almost 100 times heavier! Does it deliver a better experience in UX? I'm not sure. You can compare by yourself and decide, the subject of article is "A Modest Proposal"
The google-one is here:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/net.movies.sw/FQb1ch6nh4E/lKl_fynjW4sJ
The Usenet original is in-line:
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 (MC830713); site klipper.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsrgv!garfield!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!mcvax!vu44!botter!klipper!biep
From: biep@klipper.UUCP (J. A. "Biep" Durieux)
Newsgroups: net.movies,net.movies.sw,net.sf-lovers,net.flame,net.news
Subject: Re:
Message-ID: <401@klipper.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 2-Jan-85 15:57:13 EST
Article-I.D.: klipper.401
Posted: Wed Jan 2 15:57:13 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 3-Jan-85 14:42:44 EST
References: <2481@ucla-cs.ARPA> <1605@drutx.UUCP> <383@hou2e.UUCP> <393@klipper.UUCP> <24@epsilon.UUCP> <6719@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Organization: VU Informatica, Amsterdam
Lines: 80
In article <6719@brl-tgr.ARPA>,
geo...@brl-tgr.ARPA (Geoffrey Sauerborn (TANK) <geoffs>) writes:
>In article <24@epsilon.UUCP> you write:
>>In article <393@klipper.UUCP> biep writes:
>>>>> From: schu@drutx.UUCP (SchulteSM)
>>>>> Subject: Re: A Modest Proposal
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> q
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> w
>>>>> .
>>>>> dfslkfl;
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> lkfdg
>>>>> ;lfdkg;lka;dlgk
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ZZ
>>>>> agkfjlkadfgkj
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Yes, I agree. This is definately a proposal worth considering.
>>>>
>>>
>>>No, no, no!!!
>>>I know, it sounds nice, but believe me, it just doesn't work.
>>>Someone over here brought this up on our local network, and we've
>>>been discussing it over and again, and indeed, it sounds appealing,
>>>but when you work out the details you'll find lots of inconsistencies
>>>and problems. Don't try to reinvent the wheel, there are already
>>>enough other proposals on this net which ask for our attention.
>>>
>>Well, we've actually done it here, and it works out just fine. Of course,
>>we had to make certain minor changes like "DfXlkfl;:" instead of
>>"dfslkfl;" as was indicated in the original article. You'll note that
>>otherwise a contradiction arises when "ZZ" is implemented.
>>
>> Ed Sheppard
>> Bell Communications Research
>
>
> Alright! I'm sick of this! Why is it that every time someone
>puts a good piece into public domain, somebody has to good and change
>the source! The next thing to happen it some BO-ZO will try to use
>this changed version without taking the time to read the documentation -
>and naturally the FOOL starts flaming to the original poster!!!!
>
>
> Geoff Sauerborn
You all don't seem to get the point. Indeed, Ed, it is possible
to adapt the thing to your local network, when all machines are compa-
tible, none is running notesfiles, all are little-endian, and at least
some of them are not feeding news to decvax, mcvax or purdue (and per-
haps others, I've not yet got time to find out), and some other little
things. *But not all sites of USENET do!!!* And what is happening then
is that everybody starts making his local patches, and we end up even
worse than we started. The whole mistake is due to the starting "q",
which supposes a local "edsgr w534cb67835", since otherwise indeed "ZZ"
goes wrong in boundary cases.
I must say I do not yet completely understand Ed's patch, it
occurs to me that this only works because of some local changes to the
rot13 algorithm. That can hardly be called "portable", can it?
Geoff, I think your argument goes wrong at the word "good".
I would say: quit the idea, the gains for sf-movie-lovers do
not outweigh the burden for the rest of us.
--
Biep.
{seismo|decvax|philabs}!mcvax!vu44!botter!klipper!biep
I utterly disagree with everything you are saying, but I
am prepared to fight to the death for your right to say it.
--Voltaire
Comments