Effective February 15, 2024, Google Groups will no longer support new Usenet content

[Wally J]

Bad news for people who search before they post to Usenet:
<Loading Image...>

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. Viewing and searching of historical data
will still be supported as it is done today.
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.peering>

The bad news is that this search engine "may" stop working soon.
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.peering>
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.software.nntp>
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.net-abuse.usenet>
etc.

Is it something we said?
*Please complain to Google about their spamming of Usenet*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/hO4JNke1bNc>

[Spiros Bousbouras]

[ Crossposting to news.admin.peering , it seems relevant enough. ]

On Thu, 14 Dec 2023 22:27:12 -0000 (UTC)

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

[...]

https://support.google.com/groups?p=usenet

Well , we knew it was coming. I have mixed feelings about it. I discovered
usenet through googlegroups and for my first few years on usenet I was
posting and reading through googlegroups so I'm not going to express
unreserved joy. It's also a concern whether usenet will be able to get new
(and young) users. But with the way things have been , it's for the best.
Many newsservers which have become unusable (on some groups) because they
don't filter any of the spam , will become usable again.

Does anyone know if users who read and post through googlegroups get a
warning about what's coming ? Because if not , we should do something to warn
them. As has been pointed out several times , there do exist legitimate users
who post through googlegroups.

[Richard Harnden]

Post by Spiros Bousbouras
[ Crossposting to news.admin.peering , it seems relevant enough. ]
On Thu, 14 Dec 2023 22:27:12 -0000 (UTC)

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

[...]

https://support.google.com/groups?p=usenet

Well , we knew it was coming. I have mixed feelings about it. I discovered
usenet through googlegroups and for my first few years on usenet I was
posting and reading through googlegroups so I'm not going to express
unreserved joy. It's also a concern whether usenet will be able to get new
(and young) users. But with the way things have been , it's for the best.
Many newsservers which have become unusable (on some groups) because they
don't filter any of the spam , will become usable again.
Does anyone know if users who read and post through googlegroups get a
warning about what's coming ? Because if not , we should do something to warn
them. As has been pointed out several times , there do exist legitimate users
who post through googlegroups.

Yes, there is a blue banner at the top saying:

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

And a link to their excuse.

[The Doctor]

Post by Spiros Bousbouras
[ Crossposting to news.admin.peering , it seems relevant enough. ]
On Thu, 14 Dec 2023 22:27:12 -0000 (UTC)

"Effective February 15, 2024, Google Groups will no longer support

new Usenet

Post by Spiros Bousbouras

content. Posting and subscribing will be disallowed, and new content

from Usenet

Post by Spiros Bousbouras

peers will not appear. Viewing and searching of historical data will

still be

Post by Spiros Bousbouras

supported as it is done today.

[...]

https://support.google.com/groups?p=usenet

Well , we knew it was coming. I have mixed feelings about it. I discovered
usenet through googlegroups and for my first few years on usenet I was
posting and reading through googlegroups so I'm not going to express
unreserved joy. It's also a concern whether usenet will be able to get new
(and young) users. But with the way things have been , it's for the best.
Many newsservers which have become unusable (on some groups) because they
don't filter any of the spam , will become usable again.
Does anyone know if users who read and post through googlegroups get a
warning about what's coming ? Because if not , we should do something to warn
them. As has been pointed out several times , there do exist legitimate users
who post through googlegroups.

"
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. Viewing and searching of
historical data will still be supported as it is done today.
"
And a link to their excuse.

They are covering their incompetence!

[Grant Taylor]

Post by The Doctor
They are covering their incompetence!

No, I've worked with them.

They aren't incompetent.

They are doing what they were told to do by management.

This is a business decision, not related to people's capability.

[The Doctor]

Post by Grant Taylor

Post by The Doctor
They are covering their incompetence!

No, I've worked with them.
They aren't incompetent.
They are doing what they were told to do by management.
This is a business decision, not related to people's capability.

Interesting "decision".

Post by Grant Taylor
--
Grant. . . .

[Marc Haber]

Post by The Doctor
They are covering their incompetence!

And they even say one of the reasons is spam, while they're being the
ONE BIGGEST source of Usenet spam. Blame their own doing on others
while being on their own way out.

Greetings
Marc

[candycanearter07]

Post by Marc Haber

Post by The Doctor
They are covering their incompetence!

And they even say one of the reasons is spam, while they're being the
ONE BIGGEST source of Usenet spam. Blame their own doing on others
while being on their own way out.
Greetings
Marc

I am a bit worried that their statement could end up turning people away
from pursuing Usenet.

[The Doctor]

Post by candycanearter07

Post by Marc Haber

Post by The Doctor
They are covering their incompetence!

And they even say one of the reasons is spam, while they're being the
ONE BIGGEST source of Usenet spam. Blame their own doing on others
while being on their own way out.
Greetings
Marc

I am a bit worried that their statement could end up turning people away
from pursuing Usenet.

WEll less automation and more verification helps.

Post by candycanearter07
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

[Ray Banana]

Post by candycanearter07
I am a bit worried that their statement could end up turning people
away from pursuing Usenet.

Eternal-September's registration page says otherwise.

[DV]

Post by Ray Banana
Eternal-September's registration page says otherwise.

Hi Ray, the Eternal-September URL seems to no longer work in http, as it
appears in your signature. It's OK in https though:

<https://www.eternal-september.org>

[Marco Moock]

Post by DV
Hi Ray, the Eternal-September URL seems to no longer work in http, as

Works for me.

[DV]

Post by Marco Moock
Works for me.

It works if I ask my browser to favor the secure connection (https), but
in this case any http URL will result in an error message.

In my opinion, when an https connection is available, it is better to
add the 's' in the link.

[Marco Moock]

Post by DV

Post by Marco Moock
Works for me.

It works if I ask my browser to favor the secure connection (https),
but in this case any http URL will result in an error message.

It works for me with http and https. I use Pale Moon.

[DV]

Post by Marco Moock

Post by DV
It works if I ask my browser to favor the secure connection (https),
but in this case any http URL will result in an error message.

It works for me with http and https. I use Pale Moon.

The problem occurs in Vivaldi, and probably in other Chrome-based
browsers.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by DV

Post by Marco Moock

Post by DV
It works if I ask my browser to favor the secure connection (https),
but in this case any http URL will result in an error message.

It works for me with http and https. I use Pale Moon.

The problem occurs in Vivaldi, and probably in other Chrome-based
browsers.

What, by default, the browser refuses to load http? That's an incredibly
stupid client.

[Grant Taylor]

Post by Adam H. Kerman
What, by default, the browser refuses to load http? That's an
incredibly stupid client.

No ... it's a byproduct of evolving security on the web for the last
10-15 years.

It used to be assumed that unencrypted HTTP was the default and
encrypted HTTPS was the exception. We're now probably two thirds the
way along the migration to where encrypted HTTPS is assumed the default
and unencrypted HTTP is the exception.

Some browsers have chosen to make it so that they won't try unencrypted
HTTP without explicitly telling it to like many browsers years ago
wouldn't try encrypted HTTPS without explicitly telling them to.

It's an ongoing change.

[Marco Moock]

Post by Grant Taylor
It used to be assumed that unencrypted HTTP was the default and
encrypted HTTPS was the exception. We're now probably two thirds the
way along the migration to where encrypted HTTPS is assumed the
default and unencrypted HTTP is the exception.

Much more.
Some years ago Google started to rank down sites that only had http, so
almost all webmasters decided to enable https.

Every common browser now displays warning messages when accessing an
http site.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by Grant Taylor

Post by Adam H. Kerman
What, by default, the browser refuses to load http? That's an
incredibly stupid client.

No ... it's a byproduct of evolving security on the web for the last
10-15 years.
It used to be assumed that unencrypted HTTP was the default and
encrypted HTTPS was the exception. We're now probably two thirds the
way along the migration to where encrypted HTTPS is assumed the default
and unencrypted HTTP is the exception.
Some browsers have chosen to make it so that they won't try unencrypted
HTTP without explicitly telling it to like many browsers years ago
wouldn't try encrypted HTTPS without explicitly telling them to.
It's an ongoing change.

Your comment is inapplicable to what the O.P. complained about. The URL
Ray provided was http://www.eternal-september.org so copy and paste into
the browser's address bar is indeed an explicit instruction to use http.

[DV]

Post by Adam H. Kerman
What, by default, the browser refuses to load http? That's an incredibly
stupid client.

I have no problem with most http URLs, but the Eternal-September one
only opens with https.

[llp]

Post by Marco Moock

Post by DV
Hi Ray, the Eternal-September URL seems to no longer work in http, as

Works for me.

Works for me too.

[Sn!pe]

Post by llp

Post by Marco Moock

Post by DV
Hi Ray, the Eternal-September URL seems to no longer work in http, as

Works for me.

Works for me too.

For me, using <http://www.eternal-september.org> with Safari on
macOS 10.13 showed a warning and required the Security Policy to be
overridden. Safari on macOS 14.1 just complained that it can't connect.

<https://www.eternal-september.org> gives no problems on either OS.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by DV

Post by Ray Banana
Eternal-September's registration page says otherwise.

Hi Ray, the Eternal-September URL seems to no longer work in http, as it
<https://www.eternal-september.org>

Like Marco, I confirm that I can reach http://www.eternal-september.org/
which does not redirect to https://www.eternal-september.org/

[Spiros Bousbouras]

On Fri, 15 Dec 2023 20:17:31 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by DV

Post by Ray Banana
Eternal-September's registration page says otherwise.

Hi Ray, the Eternal-September URL seems to no longer work in http, as it
<https://www.eternal-september.org>

Like Marco, I confirm that I can reach http://www.eternal-september.org/
which does not redirect to https://www.eternal-september.org/

For me www.eternal-september.org resolves to
135.181.20.170 and 2a01:4f9:4b:44c2::2 .For the former wget says
"failed: Connection refused" .I can't connect to the latter either but I
don't seem able to connect to IPv6 addresses in general so that's not
related to eternal-september .So possibly the reason that some people
can connect and some cannot is that the people who cannot have problems
handling IPv6 addresses in general.

[Marco Moock]

I don't seem able to connect to IPv6 addresses in general so that's not
related to eternal-september.

Then check if your system has an IPv6 address (not fe80 or fd00, those
can't be used for internet communication).

[Wally J]

Post by Adam H. Kerman
Like Marco, I confirm that I can reach http://www.eternal-september.org/
which does not redirect to https://www.eternal-september.org/

I too can reach both on a slightly hardened (for privacy) web browser.
<http://www.eternal-september.org/>
<https://www.eternal-september.org/>

BTW, I love Ivo & Ray for what they do, but I need _both_ because paganini
is such a pita when it comes to posting more than a few times in a day.

About half the time bofh fails such that I have to flip over to Ray's
server. I thank them both where Ivo's server is completely different in how
it deals with more than a small handful of posts per day per IP address.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by candycanearter07

Post by Marc Haber
And they even say one of the reasons is spam, while they're being the
ONE BIGGEST source of Usenet spam. Blame their own doing on others
while being on their own way out.

I am a bit worried that their statement could end up turning people away
from pursuing Usenet.

Somehow Usenet will survive without the people who refuse to try Usenet
due to believing Google's lies.

[candycanearter07]

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by candycanearter07

Post by Marc Haber
And they even say one of the reasons is spam, while they're being the
ONE BIGGEST source of Usenet spam. Blame their own doing on others
while being on their own way out.

I am a bit worried that their statement could end up turning people away
from pursuing Usenet.

Somehow Usenet will survive without the people who refuse to try Usenet
due to believing Google's lies.

Yes, but it could still have SOME impact on new users.

[Nigel Reed]

On Fri, 15 Dec 2023 09:43:52 -0600

Post by candycanearter07

Post by Marc Haber

Post by The Doctor
They are covering their incompetence!

And they even say one of the reasons is spam, while they're being
the ONE BIGGEST source of Usenet spam. Blame their own doing on
others while being on their own way out.
Greetings
Marc

I am a bit worried that their statement could end up turning people
away from pursuing Usenet.

We need to reach out to those legitimate users that are using Google
Groups and offer them alternative access.

[Wally J]

Post by Nigel Reed
We need to reach out to those legitimate users that are using Google
Groups and offer them alternative access.

The good news is there are a plethora of free news servers they can employ.
<http://groups.google.com/g/alt.free.newsservers>
<https://alt.free.newsservers.narkive.com>
<https://www.novabbs.com/computers/thread.php?group=alt.free.newsservers>

[The Doctor]

Post by Marc Haber

Post by The Doctor
They are covering their incompetence!

And they even say one of the reasons is spam, while they're being the
ONE BIGGEST source of Usenet spam. Blame their own doing on others
while being on their own way out.

So shutting spammers down might not be a google priority.

Post by Marc Haber
Greetings
Marc
--
-------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! -----
Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header
Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " |
Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834

[candycanearter07]

Post by The Doctor

Post by Marc Haber

Post by The Doctor
They are covering their incompetence!

And they even say one of the reasons is spam, while they're being the
ONE BIGGEST source of Usenet spam. Blame their own doing on others
while being on their own way out.

So shutting spammers down might not be a google priority.

Why would you think Google cares?

[The Doctor]

Post by candycanearter07

Post by The Doctor

Post by Marc Haber

Post by The Doctor
They are covering their incompetence!

And they even say one of the reasons is spam, while they're being the
ONE BIGGEST source of Usenet spam. Blame their own doing on others
while being on their own way out.

So shutting spammers down might not be a google priority.

Why would you think Google cares?

Hence incompetence.

Post by candycanearter07
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

[Ray Banana]

Post by The Doctor

Post by candycanearter07
Why would you think Google cares?

Hence incompetence.

Google's Razor: Never attribute to incompetence that which can be
adequately explained by malice.

[The Doctor]

Post by Ray Banana

Post by The Doctor

Post by candycanearter07
Why would you think Google cares?

Hence incompetence.

Google's Razor: Never attribute to incompetence that which can be
adequately explained by malice.

Good point!

Post by Ray Banana
--
Пу́тіМ — хуйлП́
http://www.eternal-september.org

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by Ray Banana

Post by The Doctor

Post by candycanearter07
Why would you think Google cares?

Hence incompetence.

Google's Razor: Never attribute to incompetence that which can be
adequately explained by malice.

Hahahahahahahaha

[Grant Taylor]

Post by The Doctor
Hence incompetence.

Lack of caring and incompetence are two very different things.

[The Doctor]

Post by Grant Taylor

Post by The Doctor
Hence incompetence.

Lack of caring and incompetence are two very different things.

And then you have politicians.

Post by Grant Taylor
--
Grant. . . .

[Spiros Bousbouras]

On Fri, 15 Dec 2023 01:27:55 +0000
[...]

Post by Wally J

Post by Spiros Bousbouras
Does anyone know if users who read and post through googlegroups get a
warning about what's coming ? Because if not , we should do something to warn
them. As has been pointed out several times , there do exist legitimate users
who post through googlegroups.

"
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. Viewing and searching of
historical data will still be supported as it is done today.
"
And a link to their excuse.

At least they're doing something right.

[The Doctor]

Post by Spiros Bousbouras
On Fri, 15 Dec 2023 01:27:55 +0000
[...]

Post by Wally J

Post by Spiros Bousbouras
Does anyone know if users who read and post through googlegroups get a
warning about what's coming ? Because if not , we should do

something to warn

Post by Wally J

Post by Spiros Bousbouras
them. As has been pointed out several times , there do exist

legitimate users

Post by Wally J

Post by Spiros Bousbouras
who post through googlegroups.

"
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. Viewing and searching of
historical data will still be supported as it is done today.
"
And a link to their excuse.

At least they're doing something right.

And stick with it!

[The Doctor]

Post by Spiros Bousbouras
[ Crossposting to news.admin.peering , it seems relevant enough. ]
On Thu, 14 Dec 2023 22:27:12 -0000 (UTC)

"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. Viewing and searching of historical data will

still be

supported as it is done today.

[...]

https://support.google.com/groups?p=usenet

Well , we knew it was coming. I have mixed feelings about it. I discovered
usenet through googlegroups and for my first few years on usenet I was
posting and reading through googlegroups so I'm not going to express
unreserved joy. It's also a concern whether usenet will be able to get new
(and young) users. But with the way things have been , it's for the best.
Many newsservers which have become unusable (on some groups) because they
don't filter any of the spam , will become usable again.
Does anyone know if users who read and post through googlegroups get a
warning about what's coming ? Because if not , we should do something to warn
them. As has been pointed out several times , there do exist legitimate users
who post through googlegroups.

This is what you get when you cannot control spamtrollers!

Post by Spiros Bousbouras
--
"A great disturbance in the internets. It was like a million hentai lovers
voices crying out in unison, then suddenly silenced."
"automatedresponse"
www.reddit.com/r/promos/comments/6mtzb/time_warner_cable_to_block_all_usenet_access

[Grant Taylor]

Post by The Doctor
This is what you get when you cannot control spamtrollers!

I'm sure that they could have done a LOT better if management wanted
them to.

I sort of wonder if they purposely shut off some sort of filtering in
preparation for this and that's why the amount of spam spiked the way it
did recently.

Or, more likely, some internal service was replaced and the replacement
wasn't compatible with the old Google Groups Usenet gateway code, thus
the spam was no longer detected and prevented.

An Oops, followed by "let's see if anyone notices" and "oh ... they
noticed, shut it off" seems very likely.

[Wally J]

Post by Grant Taylor
I'm sure that they could have done a LOT better if management wanted
them to.
I sort of wonder if they purposely shut off some sort of filtering in
preparation for this and that's why the amount of spam spiked the way it
did recently.
Or, more likely, some internal service was replaced and the replacement
wasn't compatible with the old Google Groups Usenet gateway code, thus
the spam was no longer detected and prevented.
An Oops, followed by "let's see if anyone notices" and "oh ... they
noticed, shut it off" seems very likely.

Agree on everything stated above.
a. Management nixed it
b. Their may have been a recent event (an expired contract perhaps)
c. Spam found a way through the hole it left as a result
d. When the shit hit the fan, they decided to give up on dejagoogle

Their excuse is completely bogus though, but at least they didn't pull the
pedophile child-porn crap that AT&T used as their excuse years ago when
they pulled the plug on Usenet (well before the sex offender Baby Cuomo's
political shenanigans became common public knowledge).

Anyway, the closest archive I know of that covers "most" (many?, some?)
newsgroups is the narkive - but it really sucks in my humble opinion.

<https://news.admin.peering.narkive.com>
<https://news.admin.net-abuse.usenet.narkive.com

I would like to ask others to check it out as I've never been successful
with it; but maybe it's just the privacy stuff I have on my browsers?

[Grant Taylor]

Post by Wally J
Their excuse is completely bogus though,

No, it's not. It's not an excuse either. It's a reason. The reason
can be shortened to the last word.

They just fail to tell the whole truth -- that the vast majority of the
spam was originating from them -- and nothing but the truth -- the rest
of the fluff that they padded their statement with.

The fact that they are not discontinuing Google Groups supports that
people still use (news)groups to communicate. So any comment about
newer social media is a lie.

But, Google did admit why they were discontinuing support for Usenet;
"spam". They were just a little bit shy on other necessary details.

This perfectly matches things that I've experienced with them multiple
times before.

[Wally J]

Post by Grant Taylor

Post by Wally J
Their excuse is completely bogus though,

No, it's not. It's not an excuse either. It's a reason. The reason
can be shortened to the last word.

Hmmm... well... ah... um... er... ok. I don't disagree with you as I never
disagree with anyone (no matter who it is) who says something reasonable.

Post by Grant Taylor
They just fail to tell the whole truth -- that the vast majority of the
spam was originating from them -- and nothing but the truth -- the rest
of the fluff that they padded their statement with.

OK. Again. I can't disagree. I never disagree with a fact.
Only fools do that. (That's why they're fools after all.)

Post by Grant Taylor
The fact that they are not discontinuing Google Groups supports that
people still use (news)groups to communicate. So any comment about
newer social media is a lie.

The part about social media is what got me on flaming Baby Cuomo's assault
on the binary Usenet newsgroups - where he "conveniently forgot" that
almost all of us post on the text-only newsgroups which have no porn.

What irked me was AT&T (who was my cable supplier at that time) dropped
Usenet piggybacking on Cuomo's lies - which was an introduction to lies^2.

Post by Grant Taylor
But, Google did admit why they were discontinuing support for Usenet;
"spam". They were just a little bit shy on other necessary details.

Heh heh heh... yeah. The spam was originating from Google after all. :)

What still tells me there's more to the story than we know is that it's
trivial (IMHO) for Google to filter out the spam originating from their
servers.

Even I could do that. And I don't know a damn thing about Google's servers.
What's so hard about filtering their own users' Google-Groups-Usenet posts
when they do effective filtering with their email servers already?

Something very critical is missing from the information we're faced with.

Post by Grant Taylor
This perfectly matches things that I've experienced with them multiple
times before.

I worked for a decade alongside two of the smartest people in the world who
ended up working for Google on their search engine team, where even They
were impressed with how sophisticated the "normal" Google search was.

If you know them, I'll say their initials, where both worked in the Silicon
Valley with me, one of whom is D.G. and the other B.A. if you know them.

Also W.T. worked at Google who has argued with me many times that they're
not stupid (just like you argue here) but that they're told what to code.

[candycanearter07]

Post by Wally J

Post by Grant Taylor
But, Google did admit why they were discontinuing support for Usenet;
"spam". They were just a little bit shy on other necessary details.

Heh heh heh... yeah. The spam was originating from Google after all. :)
What still tells me there's more to the story than we know is that it's
trivial (IMHO) for Google to filter out the spam originating from their
servers.
Even I could do that. And I don't know a damn thing about Google's servers.
What's so hard about filtering their own users' Google-Groups-Usenet posts
when they do effective filtering with their email servers already?
Something very critical is missing from the information we're faced with.

Post by Grant Taylor
This perfectly matches things that I've experienced with them multiple
times before.

I worked for a decade alongside two of the smartest people in the world who
ended up working for Google on their search engine team, where even They
were impressed with how sophisticated the "normal" Google search was.
If you know them, I'll say their initials, where both worked in the Silicon
Valley with me, one of whom is D.G. and the other B.A. if you know them.
Also W.T. worked at Google who has argued with me many times that they're
not stupid (just like you argue here) but that they're told what to code.

My guess is either they were looking for an excuse to shut down the
service (maybe to save server space?), throwing a bone to get us to stop
complaining, or they legitimately forgot about the gateway.

[Marco Moock]

Post by Wally J
Anyway, the closest archive I know of that covers "most" (many?,
some?) newsgroups is the narkive - but it really sucks in my humble
opinion.
<https://news.admin.peering.narkive.com>
<https://news.admin.net-abuse.usenet.narkive.com
I would like to ask others to check it out as I've never been
successful with it; but maybe it's just the privacy stuff I have on
my browsers?

It works, posting is intentionally disabled.
I can read groups properly, some are full of Google spam.

Sadly, there is no list of all groups hosted there.

[Andy Burns]

Post by Marco Moock

Post by Wally J
the closest archive I know of that covers "most" (many?,
some?) newsgroups is the narkive

Sadly, there is no list of all groups hosted there.

Nor is there any way to contact them and request adding newer groups.

[Marco Moock]

Post by Andy Burns

Post by Marco Moock

Post by Wally J
the closest archive I know of that covers "most" (many?,
some?) newsgroups is the narkive

Sadly, there is no list of all groups hosted there.

Nor is there any way to contact them and request adding newer groups.

Davide Cavion <***@narkive.com>

[Andy Burns]

Post by Andy Burns
Nor is there any way to contact them and request adding newer groups.

I think that bounced when I tried it a few years ago.

[Wally J]

Post by Andy Burns

Post by Andy Burns
Nor is there any way to contact them and request adding newer groups.

I think that bounced when I tried it a few years ago.

I sent him an email when I first saw this email address, oh, about an hour
or so ago - so let me check for a bounceback... looks good. No return.

I asked David to look at this thread (which, let's be clear to the
naysayers, I conveniently referenced by URL) to see if he could help out.
I even suggested some of you guys might offer him improvement advice.

Now that you reminded us of the rocksolid URL, we have two search engines
to test out to see if either works as we would have wanted dejagoogle to.

<https://news.software.nntp.narkive.com>
<https://news.admin.peering.narkive.com>
<https://news.admin.net-abuse.usenet.narkive.com>
and
<https://www.novabbs.com/rocksolid/thread.php?group=news.software.nntp
<https://www.novabbs.com/rocksolid/thread.php?group=news.admin.peering
<https://www.novabbs.com/rocksolid/thread.php?group=news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
which redirects to:
<https://www.novabbs.com/computers/thread.php?group=news.software.nntp>
<https://www.novabbs.com/computers/thread.php?group=news.admin.peering>
<https://www.novabbs.com/computers/thread.php?group=news.admin.net-abuse.usenet>

Note that I only realized the redirect when I saw this in my old notes.
<https://www.novabbs.com/rocksolid/thread.php?group=rocksolid.shared.helpdesk>
--
Usenet is a team of intelligent experienced people who help each other out.

[The Doctor]

Post by Grant Taylor

Post by The Doctor
This is what you get when you cannot control spamtrollers!

I'm sure that they could have done a LOT better if management wanted
them to.
I sort of wonder if they purposely shut off some sort of filtering in
preparation for this and that's why the amount of spam spiked the way it
did recently.
Or, more likely, some internal service was replaced and the replacement
wasn't compatible with the old Google Groups Usenet gateway code, thus
the spam was no longer detected and prevented.
An Oops, followed by "let's see if anyone notices" and "oh ... they
noticed, shut it off" seems very likely.

CERtainly does sound competent.

Post by Grant Taylor
--
Grant. . . .

[The Doctor]

Post by Wally J
<https://i.postimg.cc/tgQHDyjK/dejagoogle01.jpg>
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. Viewing and searching of historical data
will still be supported as it is done today.
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.peering>
The bad news is that this search engine "may" stop working soon.
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.peering>
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.software.nntp>
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.net-abuse.usenet>
etc.
Is it something we said?
*Please complain to Google about their spamming of Usenet*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/hO4JNke1bNc>

Good news for anti-abusers!

Post by Wally J
--
Usenet is a team of intelligent old men working together for common good.

[Julieta Shem]

Post by Wally J
<https://i.postimg.cc/tgQHDyjK/dejagoogle01.jpg>
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. Viewing and searching of historical data
will still be supported as it is done today.
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.peering>
The bad news is that this search engine "may" stop working soon.
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.peering>
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.software.nntp>
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.net-abuse.usenet>
etc.

We got to provide solutions our ourselves. This is the USENET spirit
--- by the people for the people (with a sufficient sense of capacity).

Post by Wally J
Is it something we said?
*Please complain to Google about their spamming of Usenet*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/hO4JNke1bNc>

Lol!

[Tom Furie]

Post by Julieta Shem

Post by Wally J
The bad news is that this search engine "may" stop working soon.
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.peering>
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.software.nntp>
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.net-abuse.usenet>
etc.

We got to provide solutions our ourselves. This is the USENET spirit
--- by the people for the people (with a sufficient sense of capacity).

There might be enough fragmentary archives around to form a "mostly
complete" set, but it'll take a lot of time and effort to unearth them
and coordinate their collation. For some reason I don't get the feeling
that Google will have much interest in releasing theirs.

[Wally J]

Post by Tom Furie
There might be enough fragmentary archives around to form a "mostly
complete" set, but it'll take a lot of time and effort to unearth them
and coordinate their collation. For some reason I don't get the feeling
that Google will have much interest in releasing theirs.

There is the narkive which, if it actually worked, would fit the bill.
a. It has to be web searchable w/o need for a newsreader or account
b. Results must be readable by your mother or grandmother using a browser
c. It has to result in a URI to the thread and to the article

The "only" one I know of (which sucks, by the way), is this one:
<https://news.software.nntp.narkive.com>
<https://news.admin.peering.narkive.com>
<https://news.admin.net-abuse.usenet.narkive.com>

But, I repeat. It sucks. It's unreliable. Search doesn't work.
Last I had checked anyway...

Is there another current Usenet archive that meets the requirements?

[Marco Moock]

Post by Wally J
There is the narkive which, if it actually worked, would fit the bill.

Although that doesn't include stuff from the 80s/90s.

[The Doctor]

Post by Marco Moock

Post by Wally J
There is the narkive which, if it actually worked, would fit the bill.

Although that doesn't include stuff from the 80s/90s.

So can Google give the archive over?

[Marco Moock]

Post by The Doctor

Post by Marco Moock

Post by Wally J
There is the narkive which, if it actually worked, would fit the bill.

Although that doesn't include stuff from the 80s/90s.

So can Google give the archive over?

I don't think they will do that.
I also don't know if peers maybe can access it via NNTP to suck all
the articles.

[Grant Taylor]

Post by The Doctor
So can Google give the archive over?

They probably could if they were so inclined.

But I wouldn't hold my breath that they will.

Or if they did, it would probably only be the archive that they received
from DeJa News and nothing since then.

Post by The Doctor
I don't think they will do that.

Agreed.

Post by The Doctor
I also don't know if peers maybe can access it via NNTP to suck all
the articles.

Almost certainly not.

This is where the vagaries and technicalities of NNTP vs NNRP come into
play.

NNTP is server to server feeding articles.

NNRP is client to server fetching and posting articles.

Often the protocols are mutually exclusive, partially out of security
(clients can't feed) and partially out of daemon simplicity (why have
NNRP stack in a pure NNTP server).

What's more is that in my experience, the ability to be a peer and use
NNTP to feed articles is often controlled by IP. As such, any
connections from said IP is automatically doesn't have access to NNRP,
and vice versa.

[Julieta Shem]

Post by Wally J

Post by Tom Furie
There might be enough fragmentary archives around to form a "mostly
complete" set, but it'll take a lot of time and effort to unearth them
and coordinate their collation. For some reason I don't get the feeling
that Google will have much interest in releasing theirs.

There is the narkive which, if it actually worked, would fit the bill.
a. It has to be web searchable w/o need for a newsreader or account
b. Results must be readable by your mother or grandmother using a browser
c. It has to result in a URI to the thread and to the article
<https://news.software.nntp.narkive.com>
<https://news.admin.peering.narkive.com>
<https://news.admin.net-abuse.usenet.narkive.com>
But, I repeat. It sucks. It's unreliable. Search doesn't work.
Last I had checked anyway...

The address

https://news.admin.net-abuse.usenet.narkive.com

loads with updated threads, but trying to read messages results in HTTP
505, meaning we have no idea what we're doing.

[...]

[Sn!pe]

Post by Julieta Shem

Post by Wally J

Post by Tom Furie
There might be enough fragmentary archives around to form a "mostly
complete" set, but it'll take a lot of time and effort to unearth them
and coordinate their collation. For some reason I don't get the feeling
that Google will have much interest in releasing theirs.

There is the narkive which, if it actually worked, would fit the bill.
a. It has to be web searchable w/o need for a newsreader or account
b. Results must be readable by your mother or grandmother using a browser
c. It has to result in a URI to the thread and to the article
<https://news.software.nntp.narkive.com>
<https://news.admin.peering.narkive.com>
<https://news.admin.net-abuse.usenet.narkive.com>
But, I repeat. It sucks. It's unreliable. Search doesn't work.
Last I had checked anyway...

The address
<https://news.admin.net-abuse.usenet.narkive.com>
loads with updated threads, but trying to read messages results in HTTP
505, meaning we have no idea what we're doing.
[...]

That URL works just fine for me, Julieta.

[Marco Moock]

Post by Julieta Shem
loads with updated threads, but trying to read messages results in
HTTP 505, meaning we have no idea what we're doing.

Works for me:
https://news.admin.net-abuse.usenet.narkive.com/3iYQhKhL/effective-february-15-2024-google-groups-will-no-longer-support-new-usenet-content

If it doesn't for you, contact the operator:

***@narkive.com

[Julieta Shem]

Post by Marco Moock

Post by Julieta Shem
loads with updated threads, but trying to read messages results in
HTTP 505, meaning we have no idea what we're doing.

https://news.admin.net-abuse.usenet.narkive.com/3iYQhKhL/effective-february-15-2024-google-groups-will-no-longer-support-new-usenet-content

I found a thread that opens, but the first ones displaying today do not.

For instance, the address

https://news.admin.net-abuse.usenet.narkive.com/XQDMkfhu/please-complain-to-google-about-their-spamming-of-usenet

loads fine. But

https://news.admin.net-abuse.usenet.narkive.com/utLAtZzn/effective-february-15-2024-google-groups-will-no-longer-support-new-usenet-content#

does not. (The one you mentioned doesn't either.)

[Marco Moock]

Post by Julieta Shem
But
https://news.admin.net-abuse.usenet.narkive.com/utLAtZzn/effective-february-15-2024-google-groups-will-no-longer-support-new-usenet-content#
does not. (The one you mentioned doesn't either.)

Works for me after solving the captcha.

[Wally J]

Post by Marco Moock
Works for me after solving the captcha.

Thanks for teaming up to help everyone & to find the narkive admin.

Please, can one or two of you test out the search feature of the narkive?

For me, with my privacy-based setup, I wish it worked better than it does.
But maybe that's only me - which - if that's the case - then it's fine.
(My browsers are generally set to be locked up for privacy reasons.)

But it doesn't matter if I can't search - it matters if you can search.
What matters is a search results in a reference URL to a thread or post.

To be perfectly clear, I don't know much about the narkive as I usually
defaulted to dejagoogle, except when there wasn't a Google archive, e.g.,
<https://alt.comp.software.firefox.narkive.com>
<https://alt.comp.software.thunderbird.narkive.com>

Unfortunately, only for "some" ngs are there any other archives, e.g.,
<https://tinyurl.com/alt-comp-os-windows-10>

But for most newsgroups, the only archive I know of left is narkive.

As always to help the team with every action I take, I wrote a letter to
David (***@narkive.com) asking him to look at this thread and to perhaps
work with the experts here like Dave, Marco & Grant (et al.) to come up
with a solution that helps everyone search & reference old Usenet articles.

You guys are the ones who can get things done. I can only disseminate info.

[The Doctor]

Post by Julieta Shem

Post by Wally J
<https://i.postimg.cc/tgQHDyjK/dejagoogle01.jpg>
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. Viewing and searching of historical data
will still be supported as it is done today.
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.peering>
The bad news is that this search engine "may" stop working soon.
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.peering>
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.software.nntp>
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.net-abuse.usenet>
etc.

We got to provide solutions our ourselves. This is the USENET spirit
--- by the people for the people (with a sufficient sense of capacity).

Post by Wally J
Is it something we said?
*Please complain to Google about their spamming of Usenet*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/hO4JNke1bNc>

Lol!

Google Plus was much better ran!

[Marco Moock]

Post by Julieta Shem
We got to provide solutions our ourselves.

Does anybody here want to host a web interface like rocksolid light?

[noel]

Post by Marco Moock

Post by 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.

[Marco Moock]

Post by noel

Post by Marco Moock

Post by 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?

[noel]

Post by Marco Moock

Post by noel

Post by Marco Moock

Post by 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

[Marco Moock]

Post by noel

Post by Marco Moock

Post by noel

Post by Marco Moock

Post by 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.

[The Doctor]

Post by Marco Moock

Post by noel

Post by Marco Moock

Post by noel

Post by Marco Moock

Post by 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.

WEll what about pre-GG web interfaces to USenet?

[Julieta Shem]

noel <***@invalid.lan> writes:

[...]

Post by noel
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.

[Richard Kettlewell]

Post by Julieta Shem

Post by noel
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.

Usenet had spam before it had a web presence. Spam will appear anywhere
that has an audience and lacks sufficient controls to prevent it.

[The Doctor]

Post by Richard Kettlewell

Post by Julieta Shem

Post by noel
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.

Usenet had spam before it had a web presence. Spam will appear anywhere
that has an audience and lacks sufficient controls to prevent it.

And now I have freeaks signing up thinking they have an aoutsystem.

Post by Richard Kettlewell
--
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[Wally J]

Post by Richard Kettlewell
Usenet had spam before it had a web presence. Spam will appear anywhere
that has an audience and lacks sufficient controls to prevent it.

Aurgh... :)

Some of you know too much such that you miss the real problem of the spam.
You have to look at this as a BIG PICTURE thing. Not as an expert thing.

For each and every one of us, we can implement filters (much as I did with
email in the procmail days) where, in decades of reading Usenet, even I
only had a half dozen people plonked (e.g., Snit, Sn!pe, Dustin, et al.).

Their garbage could be found on the dejagoogle archives if I ever wanted to
see it - but more importantly the *amount of spam* on the dejagoogle
archives recently multiplied from a few a day to 99.5% of the newsgroup.
e.g., <http://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android>

That 200 to 1 ratio is _easily_ filtered out by you who know how.
And it's even easier to filter out by Google (if they cared to filter it).

But "something happened" recently at Google.
Such that the amount is tremendous.

What does that mean to you?
Nothing.

You can filter it out.

But what does that mean to a dejagoogle web site that isn't filtering it?

HINT: *It makes the dejagoogle web search almost unusable*.

[Grant Taylor]

Post by Julieta Shem
Maybe we should keep the USENET as hidden from the world as possible.

No. That is antithetical to the intentions of Usenet.

[Wally J]

Post by Grant Taylor

Post by Julieta Shem
Maybe we should keep the USENET as hidden from the world as possible.

No. That is antithetical to the intentions of Usenet.

I'm pretty sure she was being cleverly facetious, which I had appreciated.

What we _want_ is for Usenet content to be available to everyone.
And that was her point I believe.

We need to find an archive to pick up where dejagoogle left off.
If people can petition David at narkive, that may help us out.

[The Doctor]

Post by Julieta Shem
[...]

Post by noel
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.

What about non-tech hobbyists?

[The Doctor]

Post by noel

Post by Marco Moock

Post by noel

Post by Marco Moock

Post by 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

Hear! Hear!!

[Scott Dorsey]

Post by noel
Why would you want the content archived outside of usenet, it survived
just fine back in the say before search engines

But it did not. Most of the early Usenet archives that were turned over
to dejanews were a combination of files people had personally saved and
fragments of Henry Spencer's backup tapes from utzoo. A lot of it was
lost meaning that although there are many postings from before dejanews
was created, the selection is not random and they cannot be used for any
statistical analysis.
--scott

[Wally J]

Post by noel
Why would you want the content archived outside of usenet, it survived
just fine back in the say before search engines

Aurgh.

:)

Hi Noel,
You have to think differently. Big picture. Think of others. Not yourself.
Think of those others not being technical. They don't know what you know.

I can sense that you're likely a good person so I'm trying to be gentle
when I say there is tremendous utility to _others_ to be able to search
Usenet from today to its infancy on any platform using any web browser.

It's odd that people don't see the *utility* instantly, probably because
you know too much (not because you know too little); but let me tell you
Usenet *futility* instead, which everyone here (I'm sure) knows all about.

The futility of Usenet is it requires an account.
The futility of Usenet is it requires a newsreader of some type.
The futility of Usenet is it is (almost) never archived for long.
The futility of Usenet is that it requires knowledge to read for free.
The futility of Usenet is the search is only as good as your newsreader.
The futility of Usenet is you can't easily reference an article by URL.
(Sure, you can reference a message-id but you have to find it first)

Anyway, it's pretty irksome people don't get it that it's nice to be able
to search before posting and it's even nicer to be able to reference a
thread or article for a mother who doesn't even know how to spell Usenet.

Sigh.

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.

[Blueshirt]

Post by Wally J
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/

[Scott Dorsey]

Post by Blueshirt

Post by Wally J
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.
--scott

[candycanearter07]

Post by Scott Dorsey

Post by Blueshirt

Post by Wally J
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.
--scott

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/

[The Doctor]

Post by noel

Post by Marco Moock

Post by 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.

Now username/password protection?

[The Doctor]

Post by Marco Moock

Post by Julieta Shem
We got to provide solutions our ourselves.

Does anybody here want to host a web interface like rocksolid light?

URL?

[Andy Burns]

Post by Marco Moock
Does anybody here want to host a web interface like rocksolid light?

URL?

<https://www.novabbs.com/computers/thread.php?group=news.admin.net-abuse.usenet>

[The Doctor]

Post by Andy Burns

Post by Marco Moock
Does anybody here want to host a web interface like rocksolid light?

URL?

<https://www.novabbs.com/computers/thread.php?group=news.admin.net-abuse.usenet>

Got you!

[Sn!pe]

Post by Andy Burns

Post by Marco Moock
Does anybody here want to host a web interface like rocksolid light?

URL?

<https://www.novabbs.com/computers/thread.php?group=news.admin.net-abuse.usenet>

That looks pretty good to me, kudos to the operator.

[Wally J]

Post by Andy Burns

Post by Marco Moock
Does anybody here want to host a web interface like rocksolid light?

URL?

<https://www.novabbs.com/computers/thread.php?group=news.admin.net-abuse.usenet>

Ah. Nice. Thanks Andy. So that makes two that we know of now.

<https://www.novabbs.com/computers/thread.php?group=news.software.nntp>
<https://www.novabbs.com/computers/thread.php?group=news.admin.peering>
<https://www.novabbs.com/computers/thread.php?group=news.admin.net-abuse.usenet>
and
<https://news.software.nntp.narkive.com>
<https://news.admin.peering.narkive.com>
<https://news.admin.net-abuse.usenet.narkive.com>

Are there others?

[Marco Moock]

Post by Wally J
<https://i.postimg.cc/tgQHDyjK/dejagoogle01.jpg>
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. Viewing and searching of
historical data will still be supported as it is done today.
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.peering>
The bad news is that this search engine "may" stop working soon.

Didn't it stop working long time ago?

Post by Wally J
Is it something we said?

No, but Google doesn't care about what people say.
Be happy that they decided to keep the old content instead of
completely vanishing it and destroying millions of messages with
knowledge from the past.

[The Doctor]

Post by Marco Moock

Post by Wally J
<https://i.postimg.cc/tgQHDyjK/dejagoogle01.jpg>
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. Viewing and searching of
historical data will still be supported as it is done today.
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.peering>
The bad news is that this search engine "may" stop working soon.

Didn't it stop working long time ago?

Post by Wally J
Is it something we said?

No, but Google doesn't care about what people say.
Be happy that they decided to keep the old content instead of
completely vanishing it and destroying millions of messages with
knowledge from the past.

Google neds to pay $1 000 000 000 000 000 to every active
newserver on the planet for thier sheer incompetence!

[Adam H. Kerman]

I've cut the crosspost.

Post by Marco Moock

Post by Wally J
<https://i.postimg.cc/tgQHDyjK/dejagoogle01.jpg>
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. Viewing and searching of
historical data will still be supported as it is done today.
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.peering>
The bad news is that this search engine "may" stop working soon.

Didn't it stop working long time ago?

At least a decade and a half ago, Google stopped maintaining the
indexes. Without indexing, searching is amazingly difficult.

Yeah. What is there to save the way Google Groups presented Usenet?

Post by Marco Moock

Post by Wally J
. . .

[Marco Moock]

Post by Adam H. Kerman
What is there to save the way Google Groups presented Usenet?

Web Gateways exist and the content can be indexed by normal search
engines.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by Marco Moock

Post by Adam H. Kerman
What is there to save the way Google Groups presented Usenet?

Web Gateways exist and the content can be indexed by normal search
engines.

A News article is structured. Information from specific headers should
be indexed and tagged. Using a typical search engine, if I'm looking for
a specific author, I'm more likely than not to get a hit on a followup
article quoting the author and not a Usenet article written by that
author.

Any search engine can index a library catalog card database but failing
to understand MARC21 format won't provide a helpful result.

[Davide Cavion]

Hey! I'm the guy behind Narkive.

I agree with OP, my service kinda sucks. My only excuse is that I spent
most of 2022 rewriting the backend and was about a couple of months out
from releasing something completely new when I had to drop everything
to focus on a hardware startup (I tend to do this, but now my hands are
tied and I can't just go the other way around).

- Narkive should have most posts from 2003 onwards, and the ones before
then should be integrated at some point (I think the bulk of them might
be available from archive.org).

- 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), but again, other stuff got in the way and those servers I
bought for the job are currently sitting idle.

- The posting functionality is something that exists and should be
fairly stable and user friendly, but that I disabled because I gave up
on limiting spam coming from it. People were abusing it and doing so
manually, slowly circumventing the measures I had in place to avoid it
from happening.

Now I'm stuck between two choices: (1) is to do nothing (as I'm just
that busy) and (2) is to apply the minimum level of changes narkive
needs to maybe be ugly, still, but somewhat usable.

I could re-enable signups, posting, and maybe look into re-idexing the
content for search once, rather than in real time (using the old,
unstable search system rather than one I was rewriting). The only issue
being that if I'm succesfully, I will have won even more work to do.

Not sure what I'm trying to achieve in sending this message, but I hope
this explain what the situation is with narkive.

Davide

[Wally J]

Post by Davide Cavion
Hey! I'm the guy behind Narkive.

Thanks for returning my email, where the naysayers can note I only provided
you a URL - which is the only thing needed - which is the beauty of search.

Post by Davide Cavion
I agree with OP, my service kinda sucks.

Oh man. I am truly sorry for having said that. I apologize. The problem is
I don't know what you know. So, for example, I don't know how hard it is.

I will STOP saying it, as my way of atoning for having done that to you.

Post by Davide Cavion
My only excuse is that I spent
most of 2022 rewriting the backend and was about a couple of months out
from releasing something completely new when I had to drop everything
to focus on a hardware startup (I tend to do this, but now my hands are
tied and I can't just go the other way around).

Understood. I worked for startups in the Silicon Valley for decades.
Many here (e.g., Grant) know a lot more than I do I'll let them respond.

Post by Davide Cavion
Not sure what I'm trying to achieve in sending this message, but I hope
this explain what the situation is with narkive.

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

[Wally J]

Post by Wally J
Many here (e.g., Grant) know a lot more than I do I'll let them respond.
To me, the priority, as I see it, for the most good, is the search engine.

I belatedly realized I responded to the three groups (I don't use a
newsreader, my scripts are telnet hacks) so I am re-posting Davide's
original so that the other two groups can respond to what he said.

I'll step out of this subthread as a proper response should come from those
who are experts and I'm pretty much a putz at dealing with Usenet at this
high level.

From: Davide Cavion <***@narkive.com>
Newsgroups: news.admin.peering
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2023 23:45:22 +0100
Message-ID: <2023121523452261422-***@narkive.com>
References: <ulg14i$3o4hi$***@paganini.bofh.team>
Subject: Re: Effective February 15, 2024, Google Groups will no longer support new Usenet content

Hey! I'm the guy behind Narkive.

I agree with OP, my service kinda sucks. My only excuse is that I spent
most of 2022 rewriting the backend and was about a couple of months out
from releasing something completely new when I had to drop everything
to focus on a hardware startup (I tend to do this, but now my hands are
tied and I can't just go the other way around).

- Narkive should have most posts from 2003 onwards, and the ones before
then should be integrated at some point (I think the bulk of them might
be available from archive.org).

- 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), but again, other stuff got in the way and those servers I
bought for the job are currently sitting idle.

- The posting functionality is something that exists and should be
fairly stable and user friendly, but that I disabled because I gave up
on limiting spam coming from it. People were abusing it and doing so
manually, slowly circumventing the measures I had in place to avoid it
from happening.

Now I'm stuck between two choices: (1) is to do nothing (as I'm just
that busy) and (2) is to apply the minimum level of changes narkive
needs to maybe be ugly, still, but somewhat usable.

I could re-enable signups, posting, and maybe look into re-idexing the
content for search once, rather than in real time (using the old,
unstable search system rather than one I was rewriting). The only issue
being that if I'm successfully, I will have won even more work to do.

Not sure what I'm trying to achieve in sending this message, but I hope
this explain what the situation is with narkive.

Davide