| Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347464] |
Tue, 04 July 2017 19:04  |
|
|
Originally posted by: RS Wood
https://www.franzoni.eu/stopping-the-internet-of-noise/
Stopping The Internet Of Noise - A Useful Internet Back Again
04 July 2017 on Ollivander, rants, thoughts
The internet is getting noisy. Too noisy. Having grown up in the
nineties, with 56k dial-up, I sometimes struggle to understand how
little I'm accomplishing today with all the bandwidth I can leverage.
There were some key factors that made the old internet so productive,
by the way, and many of those factors are just gone.
This is not just a rant. I have some proposals as well.
//--clip
Read on for a fun review of the good ole days - Usenet, IRC, and RSS
feeds. I can relate to most of this. Bonus points for screenshots of
40tude and mIRC.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347465 is a reply to message #347464] |
Tue, 04 July 2017 19:30  |
|
|
Originally posted by: ANTant
I still use IRC, newsgroups, etc.! I could never go faster than 26400 dial-up
speeds where I lived due to crappy GTE/Verizon's copper systems. Not even DSL
(20K ft. to CO). :(
In comp.misc RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:
> https://www.franzoni.eu/stopping-the-internet-of-noise/
> Stopping The Internet Of Noise - A Useful Internet Back Again
> 04 July 2017 on Ollivander, rants, thoughts
> The internet is getting noisy. Too noisy. Having grown up in the
> nineties, with 56k dial-up, I sometimes struggle to understand how
> little I'm accomplishing today with all the bandwidth I can leverage.
> There were some key factors that made the old internet so productive,
> by the way, and many of those factors are just gone.
> This is not just a rant. I have some proposals as well.
> //--clip
> Read on for a fun review of the good ole days - Usenet, IRC, and RSS
> feeds. I can relate to most of this. Bonus points for screenshots of
> 40tude and mIRC.
--
:) Bday, USA!
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org (Personal Web Site)
/ /\ /\ \ Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
| |o o| |
\ _ / Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail privately. If credit-
( ) ing, then please kindly use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347466 is a reply to message #347464] |
Tue, 04 July 2017 19:38 |
Anne & Lynn Wheel
Messages: 3156
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> writes:
> The internet is getting noisy. Too noisy. Having grown up in the
> nineties, with 56k dial-up, I sometimes struggle to understand how
> little I'm accomplishing today with all the bandwidth I can leverage.
claim is that porn provided most of the funding for the video tape
industry as well as early internet. early 90s, claims that almost all
usenet bandwidth was becoming porn.
around the turn of the century, a large e-commerce hosting company
observed that they were hosting five porn websites that all had more
hits/month than the top websites in the monthly traffic reports
(i.e. porn didn't feel necessary to particpate in the traffic
sweepstakes for most monthly web hits).
1993 I did pagesat modem drivers for a couple different platforms and
co-authored article in boardwatch magazine ... in return for getting
free pagesat full usenet feed. picture with dish in backyard
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/pagesat.jpg
not long later, they doubled link speed (from 9600 to 19.2k), in large
part because of the enormous increases from porn traffic.
trivia: Late 70s & early 80s, I was blamed for online computer
conferencing (precursor to modern social media) on the internal network
(larger than arpanet/internet from just about the beginning until
sometime mid-80s). Folklore is that when the corporate executive
committee was told about online computer conferencing (and the internal
network), 5of6 wanted to fire me. Turns out the sixth, then provided
funding out of his office to do stuff. I was then working with NSF
director and was suppose to get $20M for interconnecting the NSF
supercomputer centers. Then congress cuts the budget, some other things
happened, and finally NSF releases an RFP (in part based on what we
already had running). Then as the regional networks connect into the
centers it grows into the NSFNET backbone (precursor to the modern
internet).
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/401444/grid-computing/
old NSF related email
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/lhwemail.html#nsfnet
past posts mentioning NSF
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#nsfnet
old internal network related email
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/lhwemail.html#vmsg
past posts mentioning internal network
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#internalnet
from IBMJARGON:
Tandem Memos - n. Something constructive but hard to control; a fresh of
breath air (sic). That's another Tandem Memos. A phrase to worry middle
management. It refers to the computer-based conference (widely
distributed in 1981) in which many technical personnel expressed
dissatisfaction with the tools available to them at that time, and also
constructively criticised the way products were are developed. The memos
are required reading for anyone with a serious interest in quality
products. If you have not seen the memos, try reading the November 1981
Datamation summary.
.... snip ...
past posts mentioning online computer conferencing
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#cmc
Possible saving grace was one of my hobbies was design, develop, test,
package, distribute and support enhanced operating systems for internal
datacenters. Lots of places ran my enhanced operating systems, including
the world-wide online sales&marketing support HONE systems.
.... other NSF trivia: NSF gave UC $60M for UC Berkeley supercomputer
center. However, US Regents "master plan" called for UC San Diego to get
the next bldg ... so the supercomputer center was done in San Diego
instead (and General Atomics was contracted to run the center). Also
going on at UCB there was work on "Berkeley 10M" ... which was going to
include transition from film to digital and remote viewing. Was doing
some pilot stuff at Lick Observatory with 200x200 CCDs (40kpel, there
was rumor that Spielburg was funding work on 4kx4k, 4megapel CCD). They
didn't want to take NSF money because NSF would then have control of
viewing schedule. They eventually got grant from the Keck Foundation and
it became Keck 10M and the Keck Observatory. We figured they would need
(initially) around 800kbit/sec connection for remote viewing from the
mainland.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._M._Keck_Observatory
past posts mentioning pagesat and/or boardwatch
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#38 Vanishing Posts...
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#39 I'll Be! Al Gore DID Invent the Internet After All ! NOT
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#66 UUCP email
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005l.html#16 Newsgroups (Was Another OS/390 to z/OS 1.4 migration
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005l.html#20 Newsgroups (Was Another OS/390 to z/OS 1.4 migration
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006m.html#11 An Out-of-the-Main Activity
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007g.html#77 Memory Mapped Vs I/O Mapped Vs others
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007n.html#17 What if phone company had developed Internet?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007p.html#16 Newsweek article--baby boomers and computers
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008m.html#19 IBM-MAIN longevity
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009j.html#19 Another one bites the dust
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009l.html#21 Disksize history question
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009p.html#84 Anyone going to Supercomputers '09 in Portland?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009r.html#74 bulletin board
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010c.html#75 Posts missing from ibm-main on google groups
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010g.html#70 What is the protocal for GMT offset in SMTP (e-mail) header
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010g.html#82 [OT] What is the protocal for GMT offset in SMTP (e-mail) header time-stamp?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012b.html#92 The PC industry is heading for collapse
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013l.html#26 Anyone here run UUCP?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014b.html#67 Royal Pardon For Turing
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014e.html#38 Before the Internet: The golden age of online services
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015d.html#57 email security re: hotmail.com
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015h.html#109 25 Years: How the Web began
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2016g.html#59 The Forgotten World of BBS Door Games - Slideshow from PCMag.com
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017b.html#21 Pre-internet email and usenet (was Re: How to choose the best news server for this newsgroup in 40tude Dialog?)
--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347486 is a reply to message #347464] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 04:51 |
mausg
Messages: 2483
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2017-07-04, RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:
> https://www.franzoni.eu/stopping-the-internet-of-noise/
>
>
> Stopping The Internet Of Noise - A Useful Internet Back Again
> 04 July 2017 on Ollivander, rants, thoughts
>
> The internet is getting noisy. Too noisy. Having grown up in the
> nineties, with 56k dial-up, I sometimes struggle to understand how
> little I'm accomplishing today with all the bandwidth I can leverage.
>
> There were some key factors that made the old internet so productive,
> by the way, and many of those factors are just gone.
>
> This is not just a rant. I have some proposals as well.
>
> //--clip
>
> Read on for a fun review of the good ole days - Usenet, IRC, and RSS
> feeds. I can relate to most of this. Bonus points for screenshots of
> 40tude and mIRC.
All these are still there, the great unwashed have moved on to
Facebook, etc, (SnapChat?), these come and disappear, after
attracting lots of shareholder funds (which is probably their
main aim).. Good riddance to them.
--
greymaus.ireland.ie
Just_Another_Grumpy_Old_Man
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347487 is a reply to message #347486] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 05:14 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 5 Jul 2017 08:51:50 GMT
mausg@mail.com wrote:
> All these are still there, the great unwashed have moved on to
> Facebook, etc, (SnapChat?), these come and disappear, after
> attracting lots of shareholder funds (which is probably their
> main aim).. Good riddance to them.
I sometimes wonder if they could be displaced by some kind of
peer-to-peer arrangement based on open standards providing all the
different modes of interaction[1] that the commercial platforms do without
the data collection and advertising needed to fund them since bandwidth and
storage come from the users not from some corporation.
I'm sure it's technically feasible (some tricky bits no doubt) but
[1] Eeek I'm sounding like a social scientist[2].
[2] Probably not to a real one so that's OK.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347488 is a reply to message #347487] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 05:59 |
mausg
Messages: 2483
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2017-07-05, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On 5 Jul 2017 08:51:50 GMT
> mausg@mail.com wrote:
>
>> All these are still there, the great unwashed have moved on to
>> Facebook, etc, (SnapChat?), these come and disappear, after
>> attracting lots of shareholder funds (which is probably their
>> main aim).. Good riddance to them.
>
> I sometimes wonder if they could be displaced by some kind of
> peer-to-peer arrangement based on open standards providing all the
> different modes of interaction[1] that the commercial platforms do without
> the data collection and advertising needed to fund them since bandwidth and
> storage come from the users not from some corporation.
>
> I'm sure it's technically feasible (some tricky bits no doubt) but
>
> [1] Eeek I'm sounding like a social scientist[2].
> [2] Probably not to a real one so that's OK.
>
Come down to basically "Are _you_ prepared to do it"
---
DieKleineMaus
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347492 is a reply to message #347464] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 06:59 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 5 Jul 2017 09:44:05 GMT
Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> On 2017-07-05, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On 5 Jul 2017 08:51:50 GMT
>> mausg@mail.com wrote:
>>
>>> All these are still there, the great unwashed have moved on to
>>> Facebook, etc, (SnapChat?), these come and disappear, after
>>> attracting lots of shareholder funds (which is probably their
>>> main aim).. Good riddance to them.
>>
>> I sometimes wonder if they could be displaced by some kind of
>> peer-to-peer arrangement based on open standards providing all the
>> different modes of interaction[1] that the commercial platforms do
>> without the data collection and advertising needed to fund them since
>> bandwidth and storage come from the users not from some corporation.
>
> Usenet with;
>
> - Pictures
>
> - Clients for 'phones
>
> - Transparent migration between clients
>
> The underlying transport can stay the same, since it's all worked out.
Perhaps, but I think it would be best if nobody ever had to carry
all of it, perhaps some kind of peer discovery mechanism on top of USENET
protocols would work.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347493 is a reply to message #347488] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 07:01 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 5 Jul 2017 09:59:33 GMT
GreyMaus <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
> Come down to basically "Are _you_ prepared to do it"
Catch with that is that I don't want Facebook anyway, ignoring the
privacy and data collection issues I never found it useful.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347494 is a reply to message #347464] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 08:35 |
jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
RS Wood wrote:
> https://www.franzoni.eu/stopping-the-internet-of-noise/
>
>
> Stopping The Internet Of Noise - A Useful Internet Back Again
> 04 July 2017 on Ollivander, rants, thoughts
>
> The internet is getting noisy. Too noisy. Having grown up in the
> nineties, with 56k dial-up, I sometimes struggle to understand how
> little I'm accomplishing today with all the bandwidth I can leverage.
I'm currently using a modem via a phone line which autobauds 24K-433777.
Since I only deal with ASCII, that's enough for me. Alas and alack,
it's not enough for AOL, which is my service provider. I have not
been able to send email since the beginning of May; I can receive email.
I switched the SMTP address to newsguy but AOL shut me down because
of their DMARC policies and declared the two outgoing emails I send/day
as spam.
When asking them about the problem, I was told to reinstall the browser.
I cannot use a browser because of the low baud rate. That declaration
fell on deaf ears. Apparently, they've forgotten that some of their
customers use AOLConnect which is a piece of software designed to only
deal with calling and logging into their system.
>
> There were some key factors that made the old internet so productive,
> by the way, and many of those factors are just gone.
It was productive because the eyes didn't have to waste minutes of time
searching for the collection of pixels to click on. The screens are
too "busy" to be useful.
>
> This is not just a rant. I have some proposals as well.
>
> //--clip
>
> Read on for a fun review of the good ole days - Usenet, IRC, and RSS
> feeds. I can relate to most of this. Bonus points for screenshots of
> 40tude and mIRC.
Since you started out with 56K, you're just a youngster and was
spoiled :-))
/BAH
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347497 is a reply to message #347494] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 09:35 |
hda
Messages: 47
Registered: December 2012
Karma: 0
|
Member |
|
|
On 5 Jul 2017 12:35:50 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
> RS Wood wrote:
>> https://www.franzoni.eu/stopping-the-internet-of-noise/
>>
>>
>> Stopping The Internet Of Noise - A Useful Internet Back Again
>> 04 July 2017 on Ollivander, rants, thoughts
>>
>> The internet is getting noisy. Too noisy. Having grown up in the
>> nineties, with 56k dial-up, I sometimes struggle to understand how
>> little I'm accomplishing today with all the bandwidth I can leverage.
>
> I'm currently using a modem via a phone line which autobauds 24K-433777.
> Since I only deal with ASCII, that's enough for me. Alas and alack,
> it's not enough for AOL, which is my service provider. I have not
> been able to send email since the beginning of May; I can receive email.
> I switched the SMTP address to newsguy but AOL shut me down because
> of their DMARC policies and declared the two outgoing emails I send/day
> as spam.
You need to/should use the SMTP-server address from your ISP. Any
other will be considered suspicious by them.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347498 is a reply to message #347497] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 10:28 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wed, 05 Jul 2017 15:35:01 +0200
hda <agent700@ay.invalid> wrote:
> You need to/should use the SMTP-server address from your ISP. Any
> other will be considered suspicious by them.
There's no guarantee that your ISP's relay will be trusted, I've
recently had problems with mine getting bounced by Yahoo! and eBay and
switched to the bottom tier free SMTP service (2000 per month limit) from a
commercial relay provider (not a spam shop).
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347510 is a reply to message #347498] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 11:14 |
Andy Burns
Messages: 416
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> hda <agent700@ay.invalid> wrote:
>
>> You need to/should use the SMTP-server address from your ISP. Any
>> other will be considered suspicious by them.
>
> There's no guarantee that your ISP's relay will be trusted, I've
> recently had problems with mine getting bounced by Yahoo! and eBay and
> switched to the bottom tier free SMTP service (2000 per month limit) from a
> commercial relay provider (not a spam shop).
I dislike the idea of that, it's a slippery slope to towards a limited
number of "authorised" mail providers.
Sure ... if you're going to DIY it you need to get various things in
place (static IP with matching MX/A/PTR records, no relaying from
unauthenticated users so you don't end up DNSBL'ed, issue death threats
to any users who might send spam, don't send bounces to every man and
his dog, if you have genuine mailing lists trickle them out slowly).
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347511 is a reply to message #347494] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 12:23 |
Michael Black
Messages: 2799
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wed, 5 Jul 2017, jmfbahciv wrote:
> RS Wood wrote:
>> https://www.franzoni.eu/stopping-the-internet-of-noise/
>>
>>
>> Stopping The Internet Of Noise - A Useful Internet Back Again
>> 04 July 2017 on Ollivander, rants, thoughts
>>
>> The internet is getting noisy. Too noisy. Having grown up in the
>> nineties, with 56k dial-up, I sometimes struggle to understand how
>> little I'm accomplishing today with all the bandwidth I can leverage.
>
> I'm currently using a modem via a phone line which autobauds 24K-433777.
> Since I only deal with ASCII, that's enough for me. Alas and alack,
> it's not enough for AOL, which is my service provider. I have not
> been able to send email since the beginning of May; I can receive email.
> I switched the SMTP address to newsguy but AOL shut me down because
> of their DMARC policies and declared the two outgoing emails I send/day
> as spam.
>
I've gotten sloppy since October of 2012, when suddenly I had DSL here. I
use the tablet a lot, and it's amazing how slow it can get. It's a decent
tablet, but despite the transfer speed, I do a lot of waiting when going
to a new webpage. Maybe not all pages, but a lot of them. The browser
seems to be churning to handle the page. I never noticed ads with a text
browser, and now there are video ads that startup without me letting them,
an incredible waste of bandwidth, and I'm paying for it. Or would if I
reached the limit.
I think I said it before, when everyone worried about bandwidth, in
retrosepct I think it was less about worry of using bandwidth (at least
circa 1996) but of the time it took. If you had a slow modem, and even a
56K modem was slow for long downloads, and I could never do more than one
thing once I started a download, everything else would crawl, bandwidth
took up your time, and that did affect the end user. Now people can be
wasteful, since speed is generally so fast.
I don't think the browser on the tablet caches anything, even if I go to
the previous page, it seems to take time.
Michael
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347512 is a reply to message #347493] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 12:48 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On 5 Jul 2017 09:59:33 GMT
> GreyMaus <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
>
>> Come down to basically "Are _you_ prepared to do it"
>
> Catch with that is that I don't want Facebook anyway, ignoring the
> privacy and data collection issues I never found it useful.
>
Family shares pictures of kids, etc. on FB.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347517 is a reply to message #347487] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 13:05 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2017-07-05, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On 5 Jul 2017 08:51:50 GMT
> mausg@mail.com wrote:
>
>> All these are still there, the great unwashed have moved on to
>> Facebook, etc, (SnapChat?), these come and disappear, after
>> attracting lots of shareholder funds (which is probably their
>> main aim).. Good riddance to them.
>
> I sometimes wonder if they could be displaced by some kind of
> peer-to-peer arrangement based on open standards providing all the
> different modes of interaction[1] that the commercial platforms do without
> the data collection and advertising needed to fund them since bandwidth and
> storage come from the users not from some corporation.
>
> I'm sure it's technically feasible (some tricky bits no doubt) but
>
> [1] Eeek I'm sounding like a social scientist[2].
> [2] Probably not to a real one so that's OK.
What? Peer-to-peer? Open standards? Just when we've finished rolling
everything back to '60s-style centralized systems?
Expect some heavy pushback from the Powers That Be.
--
/~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347518 is a reply to message #347512] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 13:03 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2017-07-05, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>
>> On 5 Jul 2017 09:59:33 GMT
>> GreyMaus <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Come down to basically "Are _you_ prepared to do it"
>>
>> Catch with that is that I don't want Facebook anyway, ignoring the
>> privacy and data collection issues I never found it useful.
>
> Family shares pictures of kids, etc. on FB.
Perhaps. But e-mail would work too.
--
/~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347520 is a reply to message #347498] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 13:49 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Bob Eager
On Wed, 05 Jul 2017 15:28:18 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Jul 2017 15:35:01 +0200 hda <agent700@ay.invalid> wrote:
>
>> You need to/should use the SMTP-server address from your ISP. Any other
>> will be considered suspicious by them.
>
> There's no guarantee that your ISP's relay will be trusted, I've
> recently had problems with mine getting bounced by Yahoo! and eBay and
> switched to the bottom tier free SMTP service (2000 per month limit)
> from a commercial relay provider (not a spam shop).
It depends on the ISP. My own mail server operates outgoing SMTP, and has
done for years. I have provided SPF headers for the last two years (not
sure how useful that is in practice) and am now generating DMARC headers
too.
--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347521 is a reply to message #347511] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 13:56 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Rich
In comp.misc Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote:
> The browser seems to be churning to handle the page. I never noticed
> ads with a text browser, and now there are video ads that startup
> without me letting them, an incredible waste of bandwidth, and I'm
> paying for it. Or would if I reached the limit.
This is usually the result of too much Javascript on the page.
Running NoScript in default deny JS mode makes a whole lot of pages
much faster, with the added benefit of zero auto-play video ads.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347524 is a reply to message #347521] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 14:29 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Rob Morley
On Wed, 5 Jul 2017 17:56:17 -0000 (UTC)
Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
> In comp.misc Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote:
>> The browser seems to be churning to handle the page. I never
>> noticed ads with a text browser, and now there are video ads that
>> startup without me letting them, an incredible waste of bandwidth,
>> and I'm paying for it. Or would if I reached the limit.
>
> This is usually the result of too much Javascript on the page.
>
> Running NoScript in default deny JS mode makes a whole lot of pages
> much faster, with the added benefit of zero auto-play video ads.
And the occasional "We noticed you're running an ad-blocker" pop-up
that stops you reading the page.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347525 is a reply to message #347493] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 14:46 |
mausg
Messages: 2483
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2017-07-05, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On 5 Jul 2017 09:59:33 GMT
> GreyMaus <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
>
>> Come down to basically "Are _you_ prepared to do it"
>
> Catch with that is that I don't want Facebook anyway, ignoring the
> privacy and data collection issues I never found it useful.
>
I find it handy to keep up with family members who I am not in speaking
terms with.
--
greymaus.ireland.ie
Just_Another_Grumpy_Old_Man
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347526 is a reply to message #347518] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 14:47 |
mausg
Messages: 2483
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2017-07-05, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> On 2017-07-05, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 5 Jul 2017 09:59:33 GMT
>>> GreyMaus <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Come down to basically "Are _you_ prepared to do it"
>>>
>>> Catch with that is that I don't want Facebook anyway, ignoring the
>>> privacy and data collection issues I never found it useful.
>>
>> Family shares pictures of kids, etc. on FB.
>
> Perhaps. But e-mail would work too.
>
Attachments?... Aaargh!
--
greymaus.ireland.ie
Just_Another_Grumpy_Old_Man
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347527 is a reply to message #347521] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 14:50 |
mausg
Messages: 2483
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2017-07-05, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
> In comp.misc Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote:
>> The browser seems to be churning to handle the page. I never noticed
>> ads with a text browser, and now there are video ads that startup
>> without me letting them, an incredible waste of bandwidth, and I'm
>> paying for it. Or would if I reached the limit.
>
> This is usually the result of too much Javascript on the page.
>
> Running NoScript in default deny JS mode makes a whole lot of pages
> much faster, with the added benefit of zero auto-play video ads.
Looking at the amount of kruft of a google search page
is frightening, compared to when it started.
--
greymaus.ireland.ie
Just_Another_Grumpy_Old_Man
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347528 is a reply to message #347524] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 14:50 |
|
|
Originally posted by: RS Wood
Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> writes:
>> Running NoScript in default deny JS mode makes a whole lot of pages
>> much faster, with the added benefit of zero auto-play video ads.
>
> And the occasional "We noticed you're running an ad-blocker" pop-up
> that stops you reading the page.
Which is a nice, self-selecting way of websites informing you you'll be
happier no longer visiting that site.
When I made my first webpage in 2001, my tutor reminded me it was bad
practice to build pages that require more than 30KB to display, as it
became too slow to load.
.... seems like a long ago, in an age where the scripts alone could be
ten times that size.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347537 is a reply to message #347524] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 15:41 |
Andy Burns
Messages: 416
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Rob Morley wrote:
> the occasional "We noticed you're running an ad-blocker" pop-up
> that stops you reading the page.
You can often add a custom element hiding filter to block those pop-ups :-)
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347538 is a reply to message #347524] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 16:35 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Rich
In comp.misc Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Jul 2017 17:56:17 -0000 (UTC)
> Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>
>> In comp.misc Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote:
>>> The browser seems to be churning to handle the page. I never
>>> noticed ads with a text browser, and now there are video ads that
>>> startup without me letting them, an incredible waste of bandwidth,
>>> and I'm paying for it. Or would if I reached the limit.
>>
>> This is usually the result of too much Javascript on the page.
>>
>> Running NoScript in default deny JS mode makes a whole lot of pages
>> much faster, with the added benefit of zero auto-play video ads.
>
> And the occasional "We noticed you're running an ad-blocker" pop-up
> that stops you reading the page.
Actually, with JS off, one does not get many of those (since many of
those also seem to be JS based).
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347542 is a reply to message #347538] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 17:11 |
Andy Burns
Messages: 416
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Rich wrote:
> Rob Morley wrote:
>
>> And the occasional "We noticed you're running an ad-blocker" pop-up
>> that stops you reading the page.
>
> Actually, with JS off, one does not get many of those (since many of
> those also seem to be JS based).
Another way to bypass some of them (in firefox at least) is view/style/none
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347543 is a reply to message #347464] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 17:15 |
Andreas Kohlbach
Messages: 1456
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Tue, 4 Jul 2017 19:04:51 -0400, RS Wood wrote:
>
> https://www.franzoni.eu/stopping-the-internet-of-noise/
>
>
> Stopping The Internet Of Noise - A Useful Internet Back Again
> 04 July 2017 on Ollivander, rants, thoughts
>
> The internet is getting noisy. Too noisy. Having grown up in the
> nineties, with 56k dial-up, I sometimes struggle to understand how
> little I'm accomplishing today with all the bandwidth I can leverage.
I'm going back there. Firing up an Apple ][, Commodore 64 and others (via
Emulator), and do a fake BBS connections (actually it is tunneled through
the internet and using telnet to connect to the "modern" BBS, creating a fake
dial-up modem the Apple or other computers I emulate think it's real) on
COMMSTAR or other terminal programs of the day. Not forget to set the
port no higher than 1200 Baud. *g*
--
Andreas
You know you are a redneck if
you own a homemade fur coat.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347544 is a reply to message #347537] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 18:54 |
Ian McCall
Messages: 153
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2017-07-05 19:41:47 +0000, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> said:
> Rob Morley wrote:
>
>> the occasional "We noticed you're running an ad-blocker" pop-up
>> that stops you reading the page.
>
> You can often add a custom element hiding filter to block those pop-ups :-)
If you're using macOS Safari, switching to the Reader view often works
wonders as well.
Cheers,
Ian
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347546 is a reply to message #347527] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 19:24 |
|
|
Originally posted by: The Real Bev
On 07/05/2017 11:50 AM, GreyMaus wrote:
> On 2017-07-05, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>> In comp.misc Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote:
>>> The browser seems to be churning to handle the page. I never noticed
>>> ads with a text browser, and now there are video ads that startup
>>> without me letting them, an incredible waste of bandwidth, and I'm
>>> paying for it. Or would if I reached the limit.
>>
>> This is usually the result of too much Javascript on the page.
>>
>> Running NoScript in default deny JS mode makes a whole lot of pages
>> much faster, with the added benefit of zero auto-play video ads.
>
> Looking at the amount of kruft of a google search page
> is frightening, compared to when it started.
The solution is small print so you can scan down to what you want a lot
faster!
--
Cheers, Bev
Save the whales for dessert
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347547 is a reply to message #347528] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 19:33 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wednesday, July 5, 2017 at 2:51:40 PM UTC-4, RS Wood wrote:
> Rob Morley <> writes:
>
>>> Running NoScript in default deny JS mode makes a whole lot of pages
>>> much faster, with the added benefit of zero auto-play video ads.
>>
>> And the occasional "We noticed you're running an ad-blocker" pop-up
>> that stops you reading the page.
>
> Which is a nice, self-selecting way of websites informing you you'll be
> happier no longer visiting that site.
>
> When I made my first webpage in 2001, my tutor reminded me it was bad
> practice to build pages that require more than 30KB to display, as it
> became too slow to load.
>
> ... seems like a long ago, in an age where the scripts alone could be
> ten times that size.
Unfortunately, that wise advice from your tutor is long forgotten.
Far too many web designers see it as their mission to bloat up their
websites with the latest bell and whistles. Being computer geeks, they
presume--wrongly--that all the users have the latest high speed
connections, high-powered new PC's, and the latest software to
acommodate all those fancy features.
In the real of world of industry, "bells and whistles" were frowned
upon, not applauded. Real work (ie. getting the payroll out) had to
get done on time every week without fail and bells and whistles
significantly increased the risk of system crashes and difficult recovery.
In my humble opinion, today's computer manufacturers also encourage the
bloat since it forces users to buy new hardware and software.
Some years ago, Google offered a nice interface to Usenet. Then they
replaced it, and its successor royally sucks. Why, I don't know. (The
old one managed to include ads, the new one does not.)
For some reason, the websites of Hollywood studios are badly bloated.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347548 is a reply to message #347517] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 20:18 |
Bernd Felsche
Messages: 123
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> mausg@mail.com wrote:
>>> All these are still there, the great unwashed have moved on to
>>> Facebook, etc, (SnapChat?), these come and disappear, after
>>> attracting lots of shareholder funds (which is probably their
>>> main aim).. Good riddance to them.
>> I sometimes wonder if they could be displaced by some kind of
>> peer-to-peer arrangement based on open standards providing all the
>> different modes of interaction[1] that the commercial platforms do without
>> the data collection and advertising needed to fund them since bandwidth and
>> storage come from the users not from some corporation.
>>
>> I'm sure it's technically feasible (some tricky bits no doubt) but
>> [1] Eeek I'm sounding like a social scientist[2].
>> [2] Probably not to a real one so that's OK.
> What? Peer-to-peer? Open standards? Just when we've finished rolling
> everything back to '60s-style centralized systems?
Something like https://diasporafoundation.org/ ?
> Expect some heavy pushback from the Powers That Be.
Indeed.
But then there's also the apathy and concomitant lack of ubiquitous
skills to implement even simple systems. A status quo that apprears
to be encouraged by governments and large corporations.
--
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Somewhere in Western Australia
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign | For every complex problem there is an
X against HTML mail | answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.
/ \ and postings | --HL Mencken
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347555 is a reply to message #347547] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 21:10 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
In article <9da7fbfc-cf32-4159-b0c6-779250c8dcae@googlegroups.com>,
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com says...
>
> On Wednesday, July 5, 2017 at 2:51:40 PM UTC-4, RS Wood wrote:
>> Rob Morley <> writes:
>>
>>>> Running NoScript in default deny JS mode makes a whole lot of pages
>>>> much faster, with the added benefit of zero auto-play video ads.
>>>
>>> And the occasional "We noticed you're running an ad-blocker" pop-up
>>> that stops you reading the page.
>>
>> Which is a nice, self-selecting way of websites informing you you'll be
>> happier no longer visiting that site.
>>
>> When I made my first webpage in 2001, my tutor reminded me it was bad
>> practice to build pages that require more than 30KB to display, as it
>> became too slow to load.
>>
>> ... seems like a long ago, in an age where the scripts alone could be
>> ten times that size.
>
>
> Unfortunately, that wise advice from your tutor is long forgotten.
>
> Far too many web designers see it as their mission to bloat up their
> websites with the latest bell and whistles. Being computer geeks, they
> presume--wrongly--that all the users have the latest high speed
> connections, high-powered new PC's, and the latest software to
> acommodate all those fancy features.
>
> In the real of world of industry, "bells and whistles" were frowned
> upon, not applauded. Real work (ie. getting the payroll out) had to
> get done on time every week without fail and bells and whistles
> significantly increased the risk of system crashes and difficult recovery.
>
> In my humble opinion, today's computer manufacturers also encourage the
> bloat since it forces users to buy new hardware and software.
>
> Some years ago, Google offered a nice interface to Usenet. Then they
> replaced it, and its successor royally sucks. Why, I don't know. (The
> old one managed to include ads, the new one does not.)
>
> For some reason, the websites of Hollywood studios are badly bloated.
I remember a guy teaching a web-design class many years ago, when asked why
he was recommending massive bloatware that drags performance to a
screeching halt replied "you're just bandwidth challenged". In retrospect,
strangling him with his tie might have been worth the jail time.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347556 is a reply to message #347528] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 21:37 |
Andrew Swallow
Messages: 1705
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 05/07/2017 19:50, RS Wood wrote:
> Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> writes:
>
>>> Running NoScript in default deny JS mode makes a whole lot of pages
>>> much faster, with the added benefit of zero auto-play video ads.
>>
>> And the occasional "We noticed you're running an ad-blocker" pop-up
>> that stops you reading the page.
>
> Which is a nice, self-selecting way of websites informing you you'll be
> happier no longer visiting that site.
>
> When I made my first webpage in 2001, my tutor reminded me it was bad
> practice to build pages that require more than 30KB to display, as it
> became too slow to load.
>
> ... seems like a long ago, in an age where the scripts alone could be
> ten times that size.
>
The internet baud rate has increased but the time to find a new URL is
still long. Any page with more than 5 URL will be horrible to load. The
count includes the adverts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347558 is a reply to message #347518] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 22:09 |
Michael Black
Messages: 2799
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wed, 5 Jul 2017, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2017-07-05, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 5 Jul 2017 09:59:33 GMT
>>> GreyMaus <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Come down to basically "Are _you_ prepared to do it"
>>>
>>> Catch with that is that I don't want Facebook anyway, ignoring the
>>> privacy and data collection issues I never found it useful.
>>
>> Family shares pictures of kids, etc. on FB.
>
> Perhaps. But e-mail would work too.
>
"But that's so much trouble".
I get the impression that Facebook was made to be a tiny network. So you
could share with your family and/or friends, and at some point that's what
the masses came to the internet for. They weren't interested in talking
to strangers about ideas, they wanted to keep in touch with people they
know. YOu can close up Facebook, so only the people you want to talk to
can see your page. It's become wider now, but that's probably because so
many "got" facebook to begin with, and then extended it because they
suddenly had a need.
There's one local library that's had a used book sale since about 1997,
when I started posting about local used book sales (first in the local
newsgroup, then just to my webpage). The first one, I found out about it
via a poster, the day after the sale. They were never very good about
getting listed in the local paper's free listing of events. Most of the
time I had to physically pass by the library a few weeks before I expected
a book sale, to see if they had a poster up there. Then a few years ago,
they got a facebook page, and the news after that sale someone said "we
got a larger crowd, it must be because of our facebook page". SO they
reinforce facebook, when any online presence would help. Meanwhile, my
page about upcoming local booksales usually shows up first in results
(though sometimes I wonder if google is skewing things for my benefit).
I have never registered for facebook, so any pages locked up I'll never
see. But I only read pages there because too many use facebook to
advertise their events. I'm sure they like not having to fuss with
learning html, so after a certain point facebook took off, so simple to
use.
Michael
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347559 is a reply to message #347546] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 22:16 |
Michael Black
Messages: 2799
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wed, 5 Jul 2017, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 07/05/2017 11:50 AM, GreyMaus wrote:
>> On 2017-07-05, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>>> In comp.misc Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote:
>>>> The browser seems to be churning to handle the page. I never noticed
>>>> ads with a text browser, and now there are video ads that startup
>>>> without me letting them, an incredible waste of bandwidth, and I'm
>>>> paying for it. Or would if I reached the limit.
>>>
>>> This is usually the result of too much Javascript on the page.
>>>
>>> Running NoScript in default deny JS mode makes a whole lot of pages
>>> much faster, with the added benefit of zero auto-play video ads.
>>
>> Looking at the amount of kruft of a google search page
>> is frightening, compared to when it started.
>
> The solution is small print so you can scan down to what you want a lot
> faster!
>
Until 2001, I only used lynx, the text only browser. And I ran it at my
isp, on their shell. So lynx could load a page really fast, since their
server was connected to the "pipe", and I could do things like use the
search function of lynx to find what I wanted, so the page never had to
transfer fully to my computer (over dialup). It made things really fast,
no long waits to transfer all the page to my computer, only to find it was
a dud page for whatever I was looking for.
Michael
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347560 is a reply to message #347547] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 22:18 |
Michael Black
Messages: 2799
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wed, 5 Jul 2017, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 5, 2017 at 2:51:40 PM UTC-4, RS Wood wrote:
>> Rob Morley <> writes:
>>
>>>> Running NoScript in default deny JS mode makes a whole lot of pages
>>>> much faster, with the added benefit of zero auto-play video ads.
>>>
>>> And the occasional "We noticed you're running an ad-blocker" pop-up
>>> that stops you reading the page.
>>
>> Which is a nice, self-selecting way of websites informing you you'll be
>> happier no longer visiting that site.
>>
>> When I made my first webpage in 2001, my tutor reminded me it was bad
>> practice to build pages that require more than 30KB to display, as it
>> became too slow to load.
>>
>> ... seems like a long ago, in an age where the scripts alone could be
>> ten times that size.
>
>
> Unfortunately, that wise advice from your tutor is long forgotten.
>
> Far too many web designers see it as their mission to bloat up their
> websites with the latest bell and whistles. Being computer geeks, they
> presume--wrongly--that all the users have the latest high speed
> connections, high-powered new PC's, and the latest software to
> acommodate all those fancy features.
>
> In the real of world of industry, "bells and whistles" were frowned
> upon, not applauded. Real work (ie. getting the payroll out) had to
> get done on time every week without fail and bells and whistles
> significantly increased the risk of system crashes and difficult recovery.
>
> In my humble opinion, today's computer manufacturers also encourage the
> bloat since it forces users to buy new hardware and software.
>
> Some years ago, Google offered a nice interface to Usenet. Then they
> replaced it, and its successor royally sucks. Why, I don't know. (The
> old one managed to include ads, the new one does not.)
>
It makes no sense. Usenet is text, but I have to use a graphic browser
to access google's archive. For a long time I could use a text only
browser, nice and fast, but at some point that stopped being possible.
Michael
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347561 is a reply to message #347555] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 22:20 |
Michael Black
Messages: 2799
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wed, 5 Jul 2017, J. Clarke wrote:
> I remember a guy teaching a web-design class many years ago, when asked why
> he was recommending massive bloatware that drags performance to a
> screeching halt replied "you're just bandwidth challenged". In retrospect,
> strangling him with his tie might have been worth the jail time.
>
I remember noticing that for one local site. And I outright said "either
you've got hi speed internet, or you're just viewing the page locally". A
little bit of trying to grasp what it might be like for others would help
a lot. But then, the same website went through some years of putting up a
page saying "sorry, you have the wrong browser" rather than fix the pages
so any old browser would work. If you're trying to get information out,
you don't tell people to "go away".
Michael
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347566 is a reply to message #347558] |
Wed, 05 July 2017 23:38 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
In article <alpine.LNX.2.02.1707052202140.2305@darkstar.example.org>, et472
@ncf.ca says...
>
> On Wed, 5 Jul 2017, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> On 2017-07-05, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 5 Jul 2017 09:59:33 GMT
>>>> GreyMaus <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Come down to basically "Are _you_ prepared to do it"
>>>>
>>>> Catch with that is that I don't want Facebook anyway, ignoring the
>>>> privacy and data collection issues I never found it useful.
>>>
>>> Family shares pictures of kids, etc. on FB.
>>
>> Perhaps. But e-mail would work too.
>>
> "But that's so much trouble".
>
> I get the impression that Facebook was made to be a tiny network. So you
> could share with your family and/or friends, and at some point that's what
> the masses came to the internet for.
It was originally an online equivalent of the Harvard University student
directory, which contained photos of the students and so was known as "The
Facebook".
> They weren't interested in talking
> to strangers about ideas, they wanted to keep in touch with people they
> know.
Dunno. Harvard tends to be pretty big on talking about ideas. Facebook
spread from Harvard to the rest of the Ivy League, other colleges in the
Boston area, and Stanford. It was a fairly exclusive club for a while.
That cachet was part of the early draw.
The movie "The Social Network" (which is pretty good--it won three Oscars,
one for Best Adapted Screenplay) gives a version of the founding of
Facebook---you might want to check it out.
> YOu can close up Facebook, so only the people you want to talk to
> can see your page. It's become wider now, but that's probably because so
> many "got" facebook to begin with, and then extended it because they
> suddenly had a need.
>
>
> There's one local library that's had a used book sale since about 1997,
> when I started posting about local used book sales (first in the local
> newsgroup, then just to my webpage). The first one, I found out about it
> via a poster, the day after the sale. They were never very good about
> getting listed in the local paper's free listing of events. Most of the
> time I had to physically pass by the library a few weeks before I expected
> a book sale, to see if they had a poster up there. Then a few years ago,
> they got a facebook page, and the news after that sale someone said "we
> got a larger crowd, it must be because of our facebook page". SO they
> reinforce facebook, when any online presence would help. Meanwhile, my
> page about upcoming local booksales usually shows up first in results
> (though sometimes I wonder if google is skewing things for my benefit).
>
> I have never registered for facebook, so any pages locked up I'll never
> see. But I only read pages there because too many use facebook to
> advertise their events. I'm sure they like not having to fuss with
> learning html, so after a certain point facebook took off, so simple to
> use.
>
> Michael
|
|
|
|
| Re: Stopping the Internet of noise [message #347567 is a reply to message #347525] |
Thu, 06 July 2017 00:43 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2017-07-05, GreyMaus <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
> On 2017-07-05, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>
>> On 5 Jul 2017 09:59:33 GMT
>> GreyMaus <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Come down to basically "Are _you_ prepared to do it"
>>
>> Catch with that is that I don't want Facebook anyway, ignoring the
>> privacy and data collection issues I never found it useful.
>
> I find it handy to keep up with family members who I am not in speaking
> terms with.
Aha. Point them to a non-existent Facebook account and ignore them. :-)
--
/~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
