XPost: alt.comp.software.firefox, comp.sys.mac.system   
   From: onion@anon.invalid   
      
   Maria Sophia  wrote:   
      
   > Mr Ön!on wrote:   
   > > I'm particularly interested in Usenet Newsreaders; would you please   
   > > tell me more about yours?  I've never heard of it before.   
   > >   
   >   
   > Well, assuming (and hoping) that you're not the "sn!pe" troll, the   
   > fundamental point of writing my own newsreader was simply two major   
   > privacy/usability goals because I happen to know a lot about both.   
   >  a. Full control of my privacy, and,   
   >  b. Full control of the $EDITOR (which, for me, is gVim)   
   >   
   > Of the million things I do for usability and privacy, most people only know   
   > about six of them, but there are very many layers to my usability/privacy.   
   >   
      
   There's a lot to digest in your explanation!  Thank you, I've left it   
   below for context.  Apologies for rewrapping long lines, my 'reader   
   insisted.   
      
   I'm curious to know how it is that Paul happens to use the same 'reader   
   as you do; I haven't seen seen Ratcatcher/2.0.0.25 (Windows/20130802)   
   used elsewhere before.   
      
      
      
      
      
      
   >   
   > People who deprecate it are simply saying that they don't understand it.   
   > And I don't expect them to understand usability or privacy, where, for   
   > example, almost everything I do is a single step on any platform I use.   
   >   
   > And, I do astonishing things for privacy that most people couldn't think of   
   > if you gave them a million years to ponder it, e.g., my Android contacts   
   > sqlite database is empty and yet I can do everything everyone else does.   
   >  Newsgroups: comp.mobile.android   
   >  Subject: FOSS Contacts app with privacy for backup & restore offline   
   >  Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2026 18:47:39 -0500   
   >  Message-ID: <10m3a6r$2mc6$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>   
   >   
   > The difference is I have privacy doing it, and they don't.   
   > (note most "think" they have privacy but they don't understand privacy)   
   >  Newsgroups: comp.mobile.android   
   >  Subject: How many apps on your phone have contacts read permission?   
   >  Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2026 16:51:26 -0500   
   >  Message-ID: <10mg98t$pig$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>   
   >   
   > Note people in those threads "think" their contacts are safe, but they   
   > don't even know what apps are reading them and what they do with them.   
   >   
   > As I said, privacy is a million things, of which most people know only six.   
   > For example, only the most respectful people have an empty contacts db.   
   >   
   > And nobody who cares about privacy has a mothership account on their device.   
   > Nobody ever logs into anything using their real email either, if they care   
   > about privacy, so they have ways of obfuscating the origin.   
   >   
   > My goals are always privacy and usability, where I probably maintain the   
   > most organized computer hierarchy you've ever seen in your entire life.   
   >     
   >   
   > Privacy and usability are everything, to me.   
   > Of the million things I do for both, most people can only do about six.   
   >   
   > Given those two goals, my Usenet reader is just telnet tied to stunnel tied   
   > to a bunch of ugly scripts and dictionaries which randomize the time zones   
   > periodically and randomize the headers at least once a year based on   
   > dictionaries culled off of Usenet over the years, so it's nothing special.   
   >   
   > My stunnel entry, for example, for Wolfgang's server (which I think you are   
   > using) is below, but I have a section for every nntp server I've used.   
   >  [EternalSept]   
   >   client = yes   
   >   accept = 127.0.0.1:55503   
   >   connect = news.eternal-september.org:563   
   >   verifyChain = yes   
   >   CAfile = ca-certs.pem   
   >   checkHost = news.eternal-september.org   
   >   OCSPaia = yes   
   >   
   > The use model is that everything shows up to me in gVim such that I don't   
   > even know whom I'm responding to (as I never see *any* headers) as all I   
   > see is the attribute in my gVim session, which is why sometimes I confuse   
   > Carlos with Chris, given they both seem to post similarly in my experience.   
   >   
   > Likewise, Andy and Carlos and others have noticed that I don't do any   
   > character recognition, which, in the past, has caused them issues, so I've   
   > worked closely with them in the past few months to standardize the headers   
   > by always adding these lines (previously my scripts tried to guess them):   
   >   MIME-Version: 1.0   
   >   Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed   
   >   Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit   
   >   
   > Because I don't use a "real" newsreader, there is no check that the   
   > newsgroup line is correct since I have to type that manually when creating   
   > a post, and sometimes others have noticed typos in my "Newsgroups" line.   
   >   
   > But that's due to human error as my system isn't hardened against typos   
   > in the newsgroup line like most "real" newsreaders would be hardened to.   
   >   
   > Back to the point of this thread, I've recently hardened my use model   
   > against Unicode creeping in, as most of my Usenet posts are extremely well   
   > researched as I came from the finest schools in the country and worked with   
   > the most technical companies on the planet in Silicon Valley, including   
   > being on call for the windowless brick buildings around the world, most   
   > notably at Fort Meade back in the 90s but also in Israel & elsewhere.   
   >   
   > It's important to note that of the million things I know about privacy,   
   > most people only know six, so they consider anyone who does anything for   
   > privacy must be doing so for nefarious reasons, even as they can never   
   > point out a single nefarious thing that the people do.   
   >   
   > It's against Occam's Razor but most people are simply illogical since they   
   > don't take every fact into account when coming up with their conclusions.   
   >   
   > The less they know about privacy, the more they claim that anyone who cares   
   > about privacy must be doing so because they're murdering little children.   
   >   
   > The fact they don't murder the children doesn't stop them from deprecating   
   > that people who know privacy do a million things to maintain that privacy.   
   >   
   > But back to the topic at hand, where I have a Notepad++ macro which I will   
   > append to this post so that you can understand how I ran into this issue.   
   >   
   > Bear in mind that I correlate research from a wide variety of sources,   
   > which I learned when I earned my PhD back east in one of the finest schools   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)