comp.ai.philosophy

Liste des Groupes 1
Date Sujet#  Auteur
20 Apr16:33 * All of computation and human reasoning can be encoded as finite string transformations7olcott
20 Apr18:53 `* All of computation and human reasoning can be encoded as finite string transformations --- Quine6olcott
20 Apr20:25  +* Re: All of computation and human reasoning can be encoded as finite string transformations --- Quine2olcott
21 Apr21:57  i`- Re: All of computation and human reasoning can be encoded as finite string transformations --- Quine1olcott
22 Apr19:33  `* Re: All of computation and human reasoning can be encoded as finite string transformations --- Quine3olcott
26 Apr17:28   +- Re: All computation & human reasoning encoded as finite string transformations --- Quine1olcott
26 Apr17:49   `- Re: All computation & human reasoning encoded as finite string transformations --- Quine1olcott
26 Apr16:59 o Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs1olcott
21 Apr16:50 * A conversation with ChatGPT's brain.7Richmond
21 Apr17:40 `* Re: A conversation with ChatGPT's brain.6Doc O'Leary ,
21 Apr18:26  `* Re: A conversation with ChatGPT's brain.5Richmond
23 Apr17:43   `* Re: A conversation with ChatGPT's brain.4Doc O'Leary ,
23 Apr18:22    `* Re: A conversation with ChatGPT's brain.3Richmond
25 Apr19:00     `* Re: A conversation with ChatGPT's brain.2Doc O'Leary ,
25 Apr21:01      `- Re: A conversation with ChatGPT's brain.1Richmond
20 Apr23:17 * Re: Annotated Breakdown: "computing the mapping from an input"2olcott
21 Apr00:20 `- Re: Annotated Breakdown: "computing the mapping from an input"1Richard Damon
13 Apr 25 o A new symbol? Exporting to my LLM (just in case it matters)1Anragde
16 Feb 25 o DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN1olcott
16 Feb 25 o DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF1olcott
8 Feb 25 o Re: Mathematical incompleteness has always been a misconception --- Tarski1olcott
8 Dec 24 o test1olcott
17 Nov 24 * HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar45olcott
17 Nov 24 +* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar9Richard Damon
17 Nov 24 i`* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar8olcott
17 Nov 24 i `* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar7Richard Damon
18 Nov 24 i  `* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar6olcott
18 Nov 24 i   `* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar5Richard Damon
18 Nov 24 i    `* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar4olcott
18 Nov 24 i     `* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar3Richard Damon
18 Nov 24 i      `* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar2olcott
18 Nov 24 i       `- Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar1Richard Damon
17 Nov 24 +* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar23Richard Damon
17 Nov 24 i`* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar22olcott
17 Nov 24 i `* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar21Richard Damon
18 Nov 24 i  `* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar20olcott
18 Nov 24 i   `* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar19Richard Damon
18 Nov 24 i    `* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar18olcott
18 Nov 24 i     `* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar17Richard Damon
18 Nov 24 i      `* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar16olcott
18 Nov 24 i       +- Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar1Richard Damon
18 Nov 24 i       `* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar14Richard Damon
18 Nov 24 i        `* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar13olcott
18 Nov 24 i         `* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar12Richard Damon
18 Nov 24 i          `* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar11olcott
18 Nov 24 i           `* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar10Richard Damon
18 Nov 24 i            `* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar9olcott
18 Nov 24 i             +* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar3Richard Damon
19 Nov 24 i             i`* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar2olcott
19 Nov 24 i             i `- Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar1Richard Damon
19 Nov 24 i             `* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar5joes
19 Nov 24 i              `* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar4olcott
20 Nov 24 i               `* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar3Richard Damon
20 Nov 24 i                `* Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar2olcott
20 Nov 24 i                 `- Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar1Richard Damon
7 Dec 24 `* Re: This first time anyone In the entire history of the halting problem derived a correct return value for HHH(DD)12olcott
7 Dec 24  `* Re: This first time anyone In the entire history of the halting problem derived a correct return value for HHH(DD)11Richard Damon
7 Dec 24   `* Re: This first time anyone In the entire history of the halting problem derived a correct return value for HHH(DD)10olcott
7 Dec 24    `* Re: This first time anyone In the entire history of the halting problem derived a correct return value for HHH(DD)9Richard Damon
7 Dec 24     `* Re: This first time anyone In the entire history of the halting problem derived a correct return value for HHH(DD)8olcott
7 Dec 24      +* Re: This first time anyone In the entire history of the halting problem derived a correct return value for HHH(DD)3Richard Damon
7 Dec 24      i`* Re: This first time anyone In the entire history of the halting problem derived a correct return value for HHH(DD)2olcott
7 Dec 24      i `- Re: This first time anyone In the entire history of the halting problem derived a correct return value for HHH(DD)1Richard Damon
8 Dec 24      `* Re: This first time anyone In the entire history of the halting problem derived a correct return value for HHH(DD)4olcott
8 Dec 24       +- Re: This first time anyone In the entire history of the halting problem derived a correct return value for HHH(DD)1olcott
8 Dec 24       `* Re: This first time anyone In the entire history of the halting problem derived a correct return value for HHH(DD)2olcott
8 Dec 24        `- Re: This first time anyone In the entire history of the halting problem derived a correct return value for HHH(DD)1olcott
28 Nov 24 * Probably not much time left7olcott
28 Nov 24 `* It seems very doubtful that I will live three more months6olcott
28 Nov 24  +* Re: It seems very doubtful that I will live three more months4olcott
28 Nov 24  i`* Re: It seems very doubtful that I will live three more months3olcott
28 Nov 24  i `* Re: It seems very doubtful that I will live three more months2Richard Damon
28 Nov 24  i  `- Re: It seems very doubtful that I will live three more months1olcott
28 Nov 24  `- Re: It seems very doubtful that I will live three more months1olcott
16 Nov 24 * Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis ---MY LEGACY4olcott
16 Nov 24 `* Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis ---MY LEGACY3Richard Damon
16 Nov 24  `* Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis ---MY LEGACY2olcott
16 Nov 24   `- Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis ---MY LEGACY1Richard Damon
29 Oct 24 * Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis ---13olcott
29 Oct 24 +* Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis ---11Andy Walker
29 Oct 24 i+* Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis ---2olcott
30 Oct 24 ii`- Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis ---1Richard Damon
30 Oct 24 i`* Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis ---8Jeff Barnett
30 Oct 24 i +* Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis ---4olcott
30 Oct 24 i i`* Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis ---3Richard Damon
30 Oct 24 i i `* Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis ---2olcott
31 Oct 24 i i  `- Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis ---1Richard Damon
30 Oct 24 i `* Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis ---3Andy Walker
30 Oct 24 i  `* Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis ---2olcott
31 Oct 24 i   `- Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis ---1Richard Damon
30 Oct 24 `- Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis ---1Richard Damon
12 Oct 24 * ChatGPT explains why by rebuttal of the halting problem proofs is correct4olcott
27 Oct 24 `* Re: ChatGPT explains why by rebuttal of the halting problem proofs is correct3polcott333
27 Oct 24  `* Re: ChatGPT explains why by rebuttal of the halting problem proofs is correct2polcott333
27 Oct 24   `- Re: ChatGPT explains why by rebuttal of the halting problem proofs is correct1polcott333
22 Sep 24 * have you purchased any pro account?4kami
26 Sep 24 `* Re: have you purchased any pro account?3Anna
29 Sep 24  `* Re: have you purchased any pro account?2vallor
12 Oct 24   `- Re: have you purchased any pro account?1kazu
7 Aug 24 * The Gates of the Boolean Logic10greggdurishan
7 Aug 24 +- Re: The Gates of the Boolean Logic1olcott
7 Aug 24 +- Re: The Gates of the Boolean Logic1olcott
7 Aug 24 +- Re: The Gates of the Boolean Logic1olcott
7 Aug 24 +- Re: The Gates of the Boolean Logic1olcott
11 Aug 24 `* Re: The Gates of the Boolean Logic5greggdurishan
11 Aug 24  +- Re: The Gates of the Boolean Logic1greggdurishan
11 Aug 24  `* Re: The Gates of the Boolean Logic3greggdurishan
13 Aug 24   `* Re: The Gates of the Boolean Logic2greggdurishan
17 Sep 24    `- Re: The Gates of the Boolean Logic1greggdurishan
7 Sep 24 * Correcting the AI hallucination of LLM systems2olcott
7 Sep 24 `- Re: Correcting the AI hallucination of LLM systems1Richard Damon
7 Aug 24 o test server V31olcott
2 Aug 24 * test3olcott
2 Aug 24 `* Re: test2olcott
4 Aug 24  `- Re: test1olcott
29 Jul 24 * Any honest person that knows the x86 language can see...7olcott
29 Jul 24 +* Re: Any honest person that knows the x86 language can see...5Fred. Zwarts
29 Jul 24 i`* Re: Any honest person that knows the x86 language can see...4olcott
29 Jul 24 i `* Re: Any honest person that knows the x86 language can see...3Fred. Zwarts
29 Jul 24 i  `* Re: Any honest person that knows the x86 language can see...2olcott
30 Jul 24 i   `- Re: Any honest person that knows the x86 language can see...1Fred. Zwarts
30 Jul 24 `- Re: Any honest person that knows the x86 language can see... DDD will HALT if HHH answers1Richard Damon
22 Jul 24 * Ben's agreement that D must be aborted by H --- Better words now.2olcott
23 Jul 24 `- Re: Ben's agreement that D must be aborted by H --- Better words now.1Richard Damon
22 Jul 24 * Hypothetical possibilities V23olcott
22 Jul 24 +- Re: Hypothetical possibilities V21Fred. Zwarts
23 Jul 24 `- Re: Hypothetical possibilities V21Richard Damon
20 Jul 24 * Hypothetical possibilities17olcott
20 Jul 24 +* Re: Hypothetical possibilities3Richard Damon
20 Jul 24 i`* Re: Hypothetical possibilities2olcott
20 Jul 24 i `- Re: Hypothetical possibilities1Richard Damon
20 Jul 24 `* Re: Hypothetical possibilities13Fred. Zwarts
20 Jul 24  `* Re: Hypothetical possibilities12olcott
20 Jul 24   +* Re: Hypothetical possibilities8Fred. Zwarts
20 Jul 24   i+* Re: Hypothetical possibilities6olcott
20 Jul 24   ii+* Re: Hypothetical possibilities4Richard Damon
20 Jul 24   iii`* Re: Hypothetical possibilities3olcott
20 Jul 24   iii +- Re: Hypothetical possibilities1Richard Damon
21 Jul 24   iii `- Re: Hypothetical possibilities1Fred. Zwarts
21 Jul 24   ii`- Re: Hypothetical possibilities1Fred. Zwarts
20 Jul 24   i`- Re: Hypothetical possibilities1Alan Mackenzie
20 Jul 24   `* Re: Hypothetical possibilities3Richard Damon
20 Jul 24    `* Re: Hypothetical possibilities2olcott
20 Jul 24     `- Re: Hypothetical possibilities1Richard Damon
13 Jul 24 * Who here understands that the last paragraph is Necessarily True? --- AKA a Tautology2olcott
13 Jul 24 `- Re: Who here understands that the last paragraph is Necessarily True? --- AKA a Tautology1Richard Damon
12 Jul 24 * DDD correctly emulated by HHH is correctly rejected as non-halting V229olcott
12 Jul 24 +- Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is correctly rejected as non-halting V21Fred. Zwarts
12 Jul 24 `* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is INcorrectly rejected as non-halting V227Richard Damon
13 Jul 24  `* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is Correctly rejected as non-halting V226olcott
13 Jul 24   +* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is Correctly rejected as non-halting V23Richard Damon
13 Jul 24   i`* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is Correctly rejected as non-halting V22olcott
13 Jul 24   i `- Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is Correctly rejected as non-halting V21Richard Damon
13 Jul 24   `* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is Correctly rejected as non-halting V222Fred. Zwarts
13 Jul 24    `* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is Correctly rejected as non-halting V221olcott
13 Jul 24     +* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is Correctly rejected as non-halting V217Fred. Zwarts
13 Jul 24     i`* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is Correctly rejected as non-halting V216olcott
13 Jul 24     i `* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is INCorrectly rejected as non-halting V215Richard Damon
13 Jul 24     i  `* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is Correctly rejected as non-halting V214olcott
13 Jul 24     i   `* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is INCorrectly rejected as non-halting V213Richard Damon
13 Jul 24     i    `* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is Correctly rejected as non-halting V212olcott
13 Jul 24     i     `* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is INCorrectly rejected as non-halting V211Richard Damon
13 Jul 24     i      `* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is INCorrectly rejected as non-halting V210olcott
13 Jul 24     i       `* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is INCorrectly rejected as non-halting V29Richard Damon
13 Jul 24     i        `* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is Correctly rejected as non-halting V28olcott
13 Jul 24     i         `* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is Correctly rejected as non-halting V27Richard Damon
13 Jul 24     i          `* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is Correctly rejected as non-halting V26olcott
13 Jul 24     i           `* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is Correctly rejected as non-halting V25Richard Damon
13 Jul 24     i            `* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is Correctly rejected as non-halting V24olcott
13 Jul 24     i             `* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is *IN*Correctly rejected as non-halting V23Richard Damon
13 Jul 24     i              `* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is *IN*Correctly rejected as non-halting V22olcott
13 Jul 24     i               `- Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is *IN*Correctly rejected as non-halting V21Richard Damon
13 Jul 24     `* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is INCorrectly rejected as non-halting V23Richard Damon
13 Jul 24      `* Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is Correctly rejected as non-halting V22olcott
13 Jul 24       `- Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is INCorrectly rejected as non-halting V21Richard Damon
7 Jul 24 * Sequence of sequence, selection and iteration matters4olcott
7 Jul 24 `* Re: Sequence of sequence, selection and iteration matters3Richard Damon
9 Jul 24  `* Re: Sequence of sequence, selection and iteration matters2olcott
10 Jul 24   `- Re: Sequence of sequence, selection and iteration matters1Richard Damon
9 Jul 24 o Why examine the halting problem using the x86 language?1olcott
29 Jun 24 * People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language24olcott
29 Jun 24 +* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language21Richard Damon
29 Jun 24 i`* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language20olcott
29 Jun 24 i `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language19Richard Damon
29 Jun 24 i  `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language18olcott
29 Jun 24 i   `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language17Richard Damon
29 Jun 24 i    `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language16olcott
29 Jun 24 i     `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language15Richard Damon
29 Jun 24 i      `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language14olcott
29 Jun 24 i       `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language13Richard Damon
29 Jun 24 i        `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language12olcott
29 Jun 24 i         `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language11Richard Damon
29 Jun 24 i          `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language10olcott
29 Jun 24 i           `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language9Richard Damon
29 Jun 24 i            `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language8olcott
30 Jun 24 i             `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language7Richard Damon
30 Jun 24 i              `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language6olcott
30 Jun 24 i               `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language5Richard Damon
30 Jun 24 i                `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language4olcott
30 Jun 24 i                 `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language3Richard Damon
30 Jun 24 i                  `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language2olcott
30 Jun 24 i                   `- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1Richard Damon
1 Jul 24 +- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1Fred. Zwarts
1 Jul 24 `- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1olcott
15 Jun 24 * H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES12olcott
15 Jun 24 `* Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES11Richard Damon
15 Jun 24  `* Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES10olcott
16 Jun 24   `* Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES9Richard Damon
16 Jun 24    `* Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES8olcott
16 Jun 24     `* Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES7Richard Damon
16 Jun 24      `* Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES6olcott
16 Jun 24       `* Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES5Richard Damon
16 Jun 24        `* Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES4olcott
16 Jun 24         `* Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES3Richard Damon
16 Jun 24          `* Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES2olcott
16 Jun 24           `- Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES1Richard Damon
22 May 24 * test posting2olcott
22 May 24 `- Re: test posting1olcott
15 May 24 * Re: Is Richard a Liar? (test formatting)2olcott
18 May 24 `- test of time stamp1olcott
17 May 24 * Reply to Ben's long standing objection --- I finally have the words2olcott
18 May 24 `- Re: Reply to Ben's long standing objection --- I finally have the words1Richard Damon

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal