XPost: alt.comp.linux   
   From: hayesstw@telkomsa.net   
      
   On Wed, 4 Feb 2026 19:42:59 +1100, Daniel70   
    wrote:   
      
   >On 4/02/2026 2:06 pm, Steve Hayes wrote:   
   >> On 3 Feb 2026 15:42:46 GMT, Frank Slootweg    
   >> wrote:   
   >>> Mr. Man-wai Chang  wrote:   
   >>>> On 2/2/2026 12:24 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> I normally also object to back-dating the use of the term 'app'   
   >>>>> by several decades, but if you substitute 'app' by 'program'   
   >>>>> (or 'application', etc.), then for all intents and purposes,   
   >>>>> for the user, Usenet *was* a program, which read/posted   
   >>>>> articles from/to the *local* 'spool'. A client program,   
   >>>>> reading/posting directly from/to a remote news server came only   
   >>>>> much later. Remember, NetNews/Usenet *predates* the Internet by   
   >>>>> quite a number of years.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> I disagree! Usenet is a service network, in which apps and   
   >>>> programs like newsreaders can use it. Usenet itself is NOT an app   
   >>>> nor a program.   
   >>>   
   >>> Nitpicking! :-) Note that I said "for the user".   
   >>>   
   >>> Any definition/explanation can - and probably will be - debated.   
   >>> For me, "service network" it quite meaningless, *what* kind of   
   >>> service? "communication network" isn't much better.   
   >>   
   >> The question is not what any of us think, but just what it is that   
   >> Australian and other laws prohibit persons of certain ages from   
   >> accessing.   
   >>   
   >> Prohibiting apps, like web browsers, would cut them off from a great   
   >> deal more than social media.   
   >>   
   >As I understand it, use of web browsers in not under discussion .... but   
   >access to some of the sites by those browsers IS what is under discussion.   
      
   Quite, it is not apps, but web sites that are being prohibited.   
      
   And since we have established that Usenet is neither a site, nor an   
   app, it doesn't count as a "social medium" within the meaning of the   
   Act. The Act presumably allows for some sort of prosecution of the   
   owners of affected web sites, but Usenet, like Antifa, has no "owners"   
   and no way of determining the age of participants or preventing their   
   participation. I suspect that any but the most corrupt court would   
   find a prosecution of the "owners" of Usenet ultra vires.   
      
      
      
      
      
      
   --   
   Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa   
   Web:  http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm   
   Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com   
   E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)