Bums, its all spam again, must think of something on topic for here!

With the so called  anonimised analysing of web browsing by Phorm/bt about 
to get under way, does anyone here think that  they might find themselves 
compromised?

Brian

-- 

--
___________________________________________________________________________
          I hope I grow on you....
                       I'm a Fungi!!!

No pictures, or you deserve a spanking
                       mildew_spores@blueyonder.co.uk
___________________________________________________________________________

Brian  G wrote:

> Bums, its all spam again, must think of something on topic for here!

Heh, glad you did this. I'm back exploring my old Usenet hunting
grounds (via Ggropes *shudder*), and it's awful how many of my old
haunts are more spam than anything.

> With the so called  anonimised analysing of web browsing by Phorm/bt about
> to get under way, does anyone here think that  they might find themselves
> compromised?

Not me, but then I've never hidden myself away, and so I'm probably
not one to really be commenting on the issue.

--
trin

Well, the spam is pretty filterable. I feel that most ex users of usernet 
are on web forums, a medium not easy for me  to navigate. The fact is 
though, even with all its spam, this is still here and its not being run by 
any one entity, the problem with allying yourself to web forums is that they 
are run by single entities or companies, and when the going gets rough, the 
shutters come down on anyone not squeaky clean according to the latest 
incarnation of  morality blessed by government.

Its worrying that more and more isps are dropping news servers, I guess for 
two main reasons. 1, litigation over the binary files in binary groups, and 
2, the spam problem which makes people feel its not used much.

I'd personally like to see groups like this actually used for discussions 
again, rather than confining such stuff to web sites.

Brian

-- 

mildew_spores@blueyonder.co.uk
I hope I grow on you...
I'm a Fungi!!!

If you send me pictures, you deserve a spanking!

"trin"  wrote in message 
news:99c0a795-aac4-4c52-9dfa-eaf52b326c90@z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Brian  G wrote:

> Bums, its all spam again, must think of something on topic for here!

Heh, glad you did this. I'm back exploring my old Usenet hunting
grounds (via Ggropes *shudder*), and it's awful how many of my old
haunts are more spam than anything.

> With the so called anonimised analysing of web browsing by Phorm/bt about
> to get under way, does anyone here think that they might find themselves
> compromised?

Not me, but then I've never hidden myself away, and so I'm probably
not one to really be commenting on the issue.

--
trin

In article <5w%ok.42658$E41.32151@text.news.virginmedia.com>, Brian 
Downstairs  writes
>Well, the spam is pretty filterable.

I do not knowingly use any filters, except to dump all Google Groups 
posts, but see little traffic here.

>I feel that most ex users of usernet
>are on web forums, a medium not easy for me  to navigate.

My experience also.

>The fact is
>though, even with all its spam, this is still here and its not being run by
>any one entity, the problem with allying yourself to web forums is that they
>are run by single entities or companies, and when the going gets rough, the
>shutters come down on anyone not squeaky clean according to the latest
>incarnation of  morality blessed by government.
>
>Its worrying that more and more isps are dropping news servers,

There are various independent servers.

>I guess for
>two main reasons. 1, litigation over the binary files in binary groups, and

I never felt comfortable using Usenet for binaries.
Did not seem to fit too well with original intention/design.
BitTorrent for non-copyrighted stuff is more my Tasse of chai.

>2, the spam problem which makes people feel its not used much.

Use it or lose it.

>
>I'd personally like to see groups like this actually used for discussions
>again, rather than confining such stuff to web sites.

Is this a discussion? :-)

>
>Brian
>

I was going to respond to the article you quoted, but it looks like a 
mal-formed .sig separator has snipped it.
Such is life.
-- 
vg4cysss7001
Free on-line, off-site backups?
<https://mozy.com/?ref=UK45Y5>

Brian Downstairs wrote:

> Well, the spam is pretty filterable.

Heh, if you have a decent newsreader, yes. Then again, the trouble
with filtering spam is that threads spawned from the spam can prove
pretty interesting, and if you've already filtered the thread due to
it being spam, you can miss the part where it turns interesting.

> I feel that most ex users of usernet
> are on web forums, a medium not easy for me  to navigate. The fact is
> though, even with all its spam, this is still here and its not being run by
> any one entity, the problem with allying yourself to web forums is that they
> are run by single entities or companies, and when the going gets rough, the
> shutters come down on anyone not squeaky clean according to the latest
> incarnation of  morality blessed by government.

Interesting theory, and one I think you're right about, sadly.

> Its worrying that more and more isps are dropping news servers, I guess for
> two main reasons. 1, litigation over the binary files in binary groups, and
> 2, the spam problem which makes people feel its not used much.

Or lack of use. Of course, if the lack of use is down to lack of
promotion by the ISPs, then it tends to become self-fulfilling. :(

> I'd personally like to see groups like this actually used for discussions
> again, rather than confining such stuff to web sites.

It'd be nice. I think a good medium's being wasted/lost.

--
trin

Snipped what?

Brian

-- 

mildew_spores@blueyonder.co.uk
I hope I grow on you...
I'm a Fungi!!!

If you send me pictures, you deserve a spanking!

"vg4cysss7001"  wrote in message 
news:hLYPa0JT+JpIFwGp@spam.filter...
> In article <5w%ok.42658$E41.32151@text.news.virginmedia.com>, Brian 
> Downstairs  writes
>>Well, the spam is pretty filterable.
>
> I do not knowingly use any filters, except to dump all Google Groups 
> posts, but see little traffic here.
>
>>I feel that most ex users of usernet
>>are on web forums, a medium not easy for me  to navigate.
>
> My experience also.
>
>>The fact is
>>though, even with all its spam, this is still here and its not being run 
>>by
>>any one entity, the problem with allying yourself to web forums is that 
>>they
>>are run by single entities or companies, and when the going gets rough, 
>>the
>>shutters come down on anyone not squeaky clean according to the latest
>>incarnation of  morality blessed by government.
>>
>>Its worrying that more and more isps are dropping news servers,
>
> There are various independent servers.
>
>>I guess for
>>two main reasons. 1, litigation over the binary files in binary groups, 
>>and
>
> I never felt comfortable using Usenet for binaries.
> Did not seem to fit too well with original intention/design.
> BitTorrent for non-copyrighted stuff is more my Tasse of chai.
>
>>2, the spam problem which makes people feel its not used much.
>
> Use it or lose it.
>
>>
>>I'd personally like to see groups like this actually used for discussions
>>again, rather than confining such stuff to web sites.
>
> Is this a discussion? :-)
>
>>
>>Brian
>>
>
> I was going to respond to the article you quoted, but it looks like a 
> mal-formed .sig separator has snipped it.
> Such is life.
> -- 
> vg4cysss7001
> Free on-line, off-site backups?
> <https://mozy.com/?ref=UK45Y5>

In article <Mtnpk.43374$E41.38194@text.news.virginmedia.com>, Brian 
Downstairs  writes
>Snipped what?

Message-ID: 


>
>Brian
>

What you quote comes after your .sig separator, thereby getting lost 
when you in turn are quoted.

IMO you have Outlook Express configured incorrectly, putting the cursor 
at the top when you follow-up.

OE-Quotefix fixes many such problems:
<http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/>.
Although I rarely use OE these days, I can heartily recommend this 
add-on ... unless you like to torture your readers :-)
-- 
Misha
Free on-line, off-site backups?
<https://mozy.com/?ref=UK45Y5>

vg4cysss7001 wrote:
> Brian Downstairs writes

> I do not knowingly use any filters, except to dump all Google Groups
> posts, but see little traffic here.

Well someone'll have to repost this if vg4cysss7001 is gonna see it,
since I post from Ggropes because my ISPs newsfeed is naff, and
there's absolutely no chance I'll ever convince Himself who holds the
purse-strings to fork out to pay for an independant newsfeed.

> >Its worrying that more and more isps are dropping news servers,
>
> There are various independent servers.

Yes, but they cost money that not all of us have.

> >2, the spam problem which makes people feel its not used much.
>
> Use it or lose it.

Yeah, but having to wade through the spam puts people off, it's one of
them vicious circley thangs, innit.

> >I'd personally like to see groups like this actually used for discussions
> >again, rather than confining such stuff to web sites.
>
> Is this a discussion? :-)

Looks like it to me - surely even meta discussion is still
discussion. ;)

--
trin

vg4cysss7001 wrote:

> IMO you have Outlook Express configured incorrectly, putting the cursor
> at the top when you follow-up.
>
> OE-Quotefix fixes many such problems:
> <http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/>.
> Although I rarely use OE these days, I can heartily recommend this
> add-on ... unless you like to torture your readers :-)

Of course, it's entirely possible to manually move the cursor to the
correct position for typing anyway. I run on the theory that if I can
manage to keep posts looking neat while posting from Ggropes, then -
once educated on posting guidelines - not many people have got an
excuse for dodgy snippage. ;)

--
trin