[Info-vax] [OT] Real Usenet clients, was: Re: backups and compaction or nocompaction might be better

[Paul Sture]

In article <ke971c$f1u$1 at dont-email.me>,
 Simon Clubley <clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> wrote:

> On 2013-01-29, Stephen Hoffman <seaohveh at hoffmanlabs.invalid> wrote:
> > On 2013-01-29 17:47:04 +0000, Simon Clubley said:
> >
> >> On 2013-01-29, Stephen Hoffman <seaohveh at hoffmanlabs.invalid> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> ps: Get yourself a news reader for your preferred platform and a (free)
> >>> account on Endless September, or one of the other (free) nntp servers
> >>> available.
> >>> 
> >> 
> >> $ set response/mode=good_natured
> >> 
> >> That's a bit of a change from you. :-)
> >
> > Um, OK.
> >
> > I've changed my opinion on server uptime and on some other topics, but 
> > I don't recall switching sides on the morass that is Google Groups.
> >
> > Corrections and objections here are welcome, of course.
> >
> 
> [snip Hoff's quoted message]
> 
> In previous discussions, when Google Groups started, for example, including
> HTML and XML escape entities in messages as well as encoding messages as
> one very long line per paragraph, the impression you gave at the time was
> that since Google was doing this it was suddenly ok, and we should just
> accept it.
> 
> Based on what you say here, that may not be what you intended to say, but
> that's how it came across at the time.

FWIW it didn't come across to me that way at the time.

> Simon.
> 
> PS: I'm not talking about things like encoding 8-bit non-UK/non-US
> characters for display in a 7-bit environment; that's just the reality of
> of today's international environment. I'm talking about all the other
> things they did such as, for example, HTML and XML escaping common
> characters.
> 
> PPS: Regarding the line length issue; if you ever look at the raw source
> of a message generated using Google Mail, you will see that Google break
> long lines into lines less than 80 characters in length (or at least they
> used to do when I last checked a few months ago). I see no reason why
> Google could not use the same code in their Usenet client as well.

Call me a cynic if you will, but I see it as a deliberate policy to 
persuade people to start using Google Groups, having Javascript turned 
on at all times, and being logged into Google at all times.

I stopped playing that game when I saw an advert for data centre 
products in the middle of a humorous article on a tabloid newspaper's 
web site   That was all the proof I needed that Google were not only 
tracking my interests but giving me work related ads in my leisure time.  
A brief flirtation with Google Plus also demonstrated that normal 
searches Google searches would insist that you were logged in first.  No 
thanks.

A corollary to that is that where you take a laptop or other portable 
device to work you should consider setting up separate accounts for work 
and personal use so that the various sites which attempt to track your 
interests don't serve up inappropriate ads for your context.

-- 
Paul Sture