How Google Saved USENET

Masem writes: "Salon has a well-written article article on the recent revival of much of the USENET archives from '81 to '90 by Google. It mentions that much of the recovery was thanks to years of work in transferring data off 140-some 10" magnetic tapes (~120megs of data) to a more conventional format in order to recover much of the early posts. Even a reference to the previous Slashdot story is made." Update: 01/07 23:52 GMT by T : btempleton adds: "O'Reilly Network asked me to do an article on similar themes and rememberances of USENET history." Thanks, Brad.

Comments

services like Deja/Google killed USENET

[markj02]

I'm tired of moderators moderating posts down because they disagree with the content, so I'm reposting this. Go ahead, moderate it down again, I have lots of points. But I suggest rather than having some gut reaction to this, you think about it and, if you disagree with it, post some reasoned response.

I have been using USENET for 20 years, so I am affected by this, and I have seen USENET slowly fall apart. USENET was always a bit rough and had a lot of noise, but people did get to know each other personally and professionally. Today, USENET is nearly completely useless for any kind of social functions, and the huge expansion of people posting, anonymous/pseudonymous postings, and the need to post anonymously because of searchable archives is largely responsible. There is no forum like USENET was 20 years ago anymore.

USENET used to be an informal discussion forum, like something where you might talk with others like you would around the water cooler. Google, AOL, and similar services have greatly expanded the user base for USENET, which means that it isn't much of a community anymore. And by archiving and republishing in perpetuity, thinking people have to watch carefully what they say, or they just post anonymously (or don't participate at all anymore).

This was probably an unavoidable turn of events. Nevertheless, whether it is Google or some other company, I consider it wrong for them to republish this stuff, in particular as part of a commercial venture. It's the equivalent of digging out old security surveillance tapes and broadcasting them for the amusement of the masses. It's wrong, and the fact that people find some sort of voyeuristic delight in it doesn't change that. The backup tapes that Google used should have been destroyed.