Re: How To Improve This Group

On 2025-04-11, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:

On 2025-04-11 09:44, Borax Man wrote:

On 2025-04-11, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:

On 2025-04-11 03:02, Borax Man wrote:

On 2025-04-10, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:

On 2025-04-10 08:58, Borax Man wrote:

On 2025-04-10, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:

On 4/9/25 19:40, candycanearter07 wrote:

Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote at 20:55 this Wednesday (GMT):

On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 19:00:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>

>
Well, if you COULD get more people to migrate to USENET from traditional
social media, that would be great. I personally don't think many people
are going to want to learn a new software for such an old protocol.
>

>
Well, then, maybe they should stop using email.  After all, that protocol
goes back to at least 1975.

>
Most people use a website for email, and Gmail/Outlook.

>
I see nothing but security issues in using web-based e-mail myself. If
my e-mail is not configured in a client like Betterbird, I also find it
incredibly inconvenient.
>
< snip >
>

Usenet is still very much viable as is IRC.  All that is required
is for more people to start using it -- again.
>
The case is closed.

>
I agree, the main problem from my pov is barrier to entry and
"precivable" benefits. Yes, obviously, USENET is great for being simple
and decrentralized, but the average person would not care/understand
what being "decentralized" means, and the simplicity is seen as a
drawback. And as for barrier to entry, the only real client people would
be likely/willing to use would be Thunderbird, since everything else is
either old (again, /I/ don't care, but ppl definitely would), highly
specialized FOSS programs that most of the time are targeted to Linux,
or a TUI program. And they have to configure the newsreader to connect
to a server, FIND a server, etc etc.. and no layman would go through
that just for a "retro forum experience that has barely any users". As
well as the general tech illiteracy. So, IF the barrier to entry was
lowered, and potentially a webapp made, people MIGHT be willing to try
it. I think that's a pretty long shot, though.

>
Good luck getting people to use IRC again. I spent my adolescence on
there, but it is clear that it is not attracting the same kind of people
three decades later. It's too bad because some networks, like Rizon, are
doing a fantastic job with their servers. Nonetheless, IRC apparently
isn't as appealing in its uncensored, decentralized nature as a
proprietary, centralized social medium like Instagram's comment section is.
>
To be honest, I'm glad that neither IRC nor Usenet attract those kinds
of people anyway. I'd rather know that I'm communicating with
sufficiently smart individuals on the old networks than the vapid,
superficial cretins on modern social media.
>

>
IRC doesn't have stickers, animated emojis, GIFs.  You cannot review
messages that came through when you were offline.  Almost now changing
of fonts.  No avatars.  It takes a bit to learn (depending on the
client).  No advertising, no extra "features" such as NFTs and skins or
what have you.  No reactions and no branding (ie, logos for chat groups).
>
I'm saying this not because I agree, but because this is what people
want.  I do prefer the simplicity of IRC myself, bit IRC is not coming
back.  There are no good mobile clients...

>
Who the heck would want to use IRC on a cell phone anyway? It's made to
be used with a keyboard. Anyways, if people want to get off of it in
favour of something like Discord, all the power to them. However, I
wouldn't want these people to complain once they're faced with a
bombardment of advertisements and mass censorship.
>

>
People use their phones a lot for chat. Some chat places I hang out on,
I'd say MOST are on their phone.  Someone younger asked me how I
responded with lng replies so quickly, and I said I was using my laptop.
They thought I was *WEIRD*!  It wasn't IRC, but still, the point is
people just pull out their phones and use that, rather than a keyboard.
The phone is "just there".  I think its a devolution, a backwards step
in communication, but thats what is happening.

>
I'll say this much: being exposed to today's youth on a daily basis, I
can confirm that this generation is dumber than the previous and that it
too was dumber than the one that preceded it. We're all getting better
at using software, but we're forgetting how to accomplish basic, more
critical tasks. I might have mentioned it before but I use an old
MacBook Air 2017 with Linux Mint in the classroom. From time to time,
while the screen is mirrored to a larger screen in the class, I might
open up a terminal and simply write in "sudo apt upgrade." To the kids,
I'm hacking. Similarly, a student asked me how great my "new" computer
is by asking me how many pings it has. These are kids who don't know how
to write an introduction or a conclusion to a text despite it being
taught to them in both language classes they have, who make mistakes
such as "je n'est pas de question" which translates to "I don't is a
question" in English despite the language being a part of their daily
lives, who don't know whether 6 on 10 is a passing mark, etc.. I guess
it shouldn't be surprising that the progressive political parties get so
much support considering the intellect of the populace.
>

 
Not too many of my generation really knew their way around a computer
either.  Some learned it, because you needed to to get Napster working,
or install Grand Prix 2 addons or whatever.  The difference is today you
don't need to learn anything.  I've seen chimps use phones, whereas back
in the early 90s, you kind of had to learn a bit of DOS to do anything
on your computer.  Many people learned how to "CD" to a directory,
perhaps run "A:setup", start a program, but just that and not much more.
You couldn't get far not knowing the OS in the past, but you can get far
today.  This is probably true with everything, there is a greater
tolerance of ignorance and lower standards.  Technology hides all the
details, but that was a trend even 30 years ago when "User Friendly" was
a widely used buzzword.  Does this mean the kids are dumber?  Well, hard
to say.  Demographics has changed, which adds another variable, but
demographic change aside I don't think there has been a loss in
intelligence, just more pandering and fewer demands.  Tech companies do
their utmost to hide the inner workings, so we have people who have no
idea what can actually be done.
 
I'm often amazed at work how crappy our workflows are, that despite all
the computing power, we do things in a really inefficnet way, such as
taking screenshots of Excel pages, putting the screenshot in an email,
sending it to someone else, for them to enter that data into another
excel spreadsheet, which they can't copy and past, because its a
screenshot, but have to visually read and type, then send it back to
those who sent the screenshot for verification.  There are far, far
better solutions, but they simply are not taught about them, are not
aware of them.
 
Probably why stuff gets reinvented all the time.  People forget, or are
unware of things like NNTP and IRC, and just reinvent it again.

>
In the case of NNTP, American Congress seems to have been succesful in
killing most of it. If I remember correctly, some poorly informed
politician had no idea what was going on on Usenet or even how to use
it, but he felt that he could complain about its contents anyway. As a
result, ISPs stopped providing a news server. The result is that those
of us on Usenet are usually people who lived in the before times and are
aware of its existence. I doubt that people under the age of 40 even
know what a Usenet is. As for IRC, it is never mentioned to users of the
Internet. Few web sites talk about it and ISPs themselves don't even
mention its existence. After all, there is no money in it, so why would
they bother. Instead, people are told about things like Discord and
TikTok because there is a way of monetizing a user's presence on those
sites. Once again, the people on IRC are usually Linux users who venture
onto their distribution of choice's support channel, or people from he
before times who are aware of its existence.
>

Yes, I remember my ISP carried Usenet, and cancelled it.  I'm in
Australia though, so it may be for different reasons.  It could simply
have been too much bother.  It would have taken a lot of bandwidth and
storage for something most customers weren't aware of.  It was sad to
see it go, and I do wish they maintained it, but from a business point
of view, I do understand.  They cancelled it mid or late 2000s, or
possible later.

I suppose then it is our job to mention these technologies and make
people aware of alternatives to the privacy traps and algorthmic
straight jackets that more modern alternatives hoist on thier
victims... um... users...

I set these up for my own personal clique, but they're not much into
communicating anyway, or are simply put or, or confused, by any client
that is not web based or an "app".  Unfortunately, I've not been able to
find a good NNTP web frontend that allows only encrypted connections.
Maybe I'll get to work on modifying an existing one to make it the way I
think it should be.