From: nospam@example.net
On Thu, 20 Feb 2025, Salvador Mirzo wrote:
> snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) writes:
>
>> Salvador Mirzo wrote:
>>
>>> D writes:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> My dream is that people will start to use small self-hosted,
>>>> end-to-end encrypted chat services, so that the laws forbidding
>>>> encryption become meaningless.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That's my idea, too. I don't think the USENET is actually a perfect
>>> project. I think communities should not too large. So I think we
>>> should build more NNTP servers to be used by small communities. And
>>> then these servers should have a standard API so that an index could be
>>> created somewhere where people can discover communities.
>>>
>>> Imagine how many closed NNTP servers, mailing lists are out there and
>>> nobody knows.
>> [...]
>>
>> Closed NNTP newsservers are not Usenet, just local proprietary news.
>> They're operated by a server owner who has the power of booting users
>> off his server if he doesn't like their opinions. Those users have no
>> alternative server to use for those local groups so they've effectively
>> been censored, exactly like web forums with a cadre of moderators.
>>
>> With Usenet there are many servers, each carrying a subset of groups
>> from the full group list. If a server operator TOSes a user they're at
>> liberty to use another service and still access their groups uncensored.
>
> That's right. But I think we need the closed ones too. But I also
> think the closed ones are a good way to show people that there's
> something out there that's the USENET. So if they every get censored on
> a closed NNTP server, they could still go to a USENET server and still
> have a community they can't be banned from.
>
I think that more choice is better! Some will prefer small, private
communities, some the global usenet, and some will switch between the two.
=)
--- SoupGate-DOS v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
