Slashdot Mirror


Comcast Discontinues Customers' USENET Service

An anonymous reader writes "Comcast has discontinued its provided usenet service, once provided to all its high speed customers. First with the cap put on its customers several years ago on amount of traffic provided as part of the customer high-speed package, as of September 16, the service is no longer provided. Without fanfare, this bastion of the internet is being removed from the mainstream."

56 of 327 comments (clear)

  1. So? by demonlapin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Does anybody still actually use usenet for anything other than the binary groups? I haven't touched it in a decade, mainly because the spam got so bad.

    1. Re:So? by houghi · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes. I like it much better then forums for support.

      I hardly ever see any spam. Mainly because it is filtered out.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    2. Re:So? by c_g_hills · · Score: 4, Insightful

      For a while, Google Groups used to be a good way to search usenet. Since they allowed anyone to create a group on Google Groups, it is now completely riddled with spam and next to useless.

      That said, I wish more web forums would provide a nntp front-end (gmane is a great example - although it is oriented towards mailing lists). It is far easier to follow discussions when you use the same interface throughout. If a feature is missing, you can always code it yourself. With web forums, you are limited to the server software.

    3. Re:So? by PainMeds · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Does anybody still actually use usenet for anything other than the binary groups? I haven't touched it in a decade, mainly because the spam got so bad.

      Occasionally, you'll find a computer club filled with x-hippies exchanging correspondence solely over usenet; I think they do it for the privacy that comes with ghost towns. Even they have their binary groups, though; mainly fonts and different versions of Maelstrom.

    4. Re:So? by Pharmboy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I rather miss using USENET, although it has become less useful over the last few years due to the spam and flood of binary files (which are useful by themselves...). The conversations in a newsgroup is much higher caliber than you find in forums, mainly due to the fact that most people would actually THINK before writing, knowing that someone isn't going to read it 5 seconds later. It is more like the BBS forums of yesteryear, which of course, were born of USENET itself and often a part of.

      I wouldn't be shocked if a few years down the line, there comes a reason for people to start using USENET more often, seeking better quality conversation. The primary problem now is that a web browser isn't a very good platform to read USENET posts, what we need is a better app or an overhaul of the system to make it more useable. Agent and other apps are ok, but mainly for binaries. USENET was basically the first use for the internet and hasn't changed any since then.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    5. Re:So? by demonlapin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Filtered by what? Your newsreader, or your provider?

      I have to admit a certain laziness, in that I didn't like most of the newsreaders I tried (they didn't thread properly) and I never went back and tried newer ones later.

    6. Re:So? by houghi · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Filtered out by the providers. I only filter out trolls.
      I get perhaps 1 or 2 spam messages per day and that probably because I fetch news every 15 minutes, so the spam filters were not able to pick it up yet and delete it.

      slrn is still the way to go for me. Never ever had an issue with the way it thread.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    7. Re:So? by Mandrel · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Much of the spam's gone away since Usenet became a backwater. This accelerated after Google removed the "Groups" link from their front page.

      As well, Gmane gateways mailing lists to newsgroups, allowing both reading and posting with a nice interface, without the need to download every message.

    8. Re:So? by sa1lnr · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, 400 posts a day on sci.electronics.design. I subscribe to 35 text only newsgroups, even the OS/2 ones are still active. ;)

    9. Re:So? by houghi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Google groups started to suck when they changed the interface from DejaNews to the one from Google. From then on it went down to so much that I never use it anymore. Not even to search for solutions.

      Also, please no forums and NNTP mix up. NNTP is not a web forum and a webforum is not NNTP.
      Each and every webforum that has an NNTP interface sucks for either one or the other.

      There are plenty of free usenet servers for text groups (and free IPv6 for binaries) that there is no need to use a webinterface. And if you boss does not want you to use Usenet, then do without it. His loss, not yours if he doesn't give you the tools to work with.

      Usenet does not need you to answer in 2 minutes. So if you only have a connection during the weekend, that is OK.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    10. Re:So? by Rocketship+Underpant · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The USENET is practically the only place on earth everyone can share anonymous (if desired), unmoderated, uncensored, de-centralized discussion on any topic. You can share ideas and ask questions on USENET you can't easily ask anywhere else.

      It's the only thing of its kind in all of history, and I hope it sticks around.

      --
      He who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
    11. Re:So? by galactic-ac · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes. I like it much better then forums for support.

      For programmers, Usenet is can be more valuable for expert help than any forum I've encountered. This seems to be because a majority of people who still using Usenet (ignoring most of the posting via Google Groups) carry lots of collective experience in their fields. The barrier to entry is sufficiently high, scary as that may be, that a lot less bad information gets distributed. And if a bad answer is given, a dozen other experts will correct it within minutes.

    12. Re:So? by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Google groups started to suck when they changed the interface from DejaNews to the one from Google. From then on it went down to so much that I never use it anymore. Not even to search for solutions.

      Also, please no forums and NNTP mix up. NNTP is not a web forum and a webforum is not NNTP.
      Each and every webforum that has an NNTP interface sucks for either one or the other.

      There are plenty of free usenet servers for text groups (and free IPv6 for binaries) that there is no need to use a webinterface. And if you boss does not want you to use Usenet, then do without it. His loss, not yours if he doesn't give you the tools to work with.

      Usenet does not need you to answer in 2 minutes. So if you only have a connection during the weekend, that is OK.

      I agree. Google's pretty good at acquiring technologies from other companies (Google Maps, Earth, etc) and making the interface better or at least not hurting it, but the moment they made changes to Dejanews they began removing functionality and usability. Dejanews was the great free web-based nntp reader, and making available all the messages since usenet's inception didn't make up for making searches or browsing within a group much less effective.

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
    13. Re:So? by houghi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The main reason that the discussions are of a higher level is that accessing them needs more effort.
      e.g. a person has to first know it exists, then needs to configure (perhaps even download) a newsreader and know what goes where.

      This means that people who have absolutely no knowledge of the medium will seldom get to Usenet. It is a minority who uses it and those are also the people who have some internet experience.

      Seldom have I seen people posting that did not know what it was. That is until some 'forums' started to host Usenet and made the access easy.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    14. Re:So? by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I post via Google Groups, you insensitive clod!

      Seriously, it's just convenient, I can do it from anywhere, and Google Groups makes following a thread's history a LOT easier than any usenet reader (particularly when you're coming into the middle of a conversation).

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    15. Re:So? by beacher · · Score: 4, Funny

      "I read USENET for the great articles"

      s/USENET/PlayBoy/

      Me for one - I'm not going to miss it. Comcast limited you to a 1G ( I think they raised it to 2G in the last year) and I'm usually warming up about that point. Switched over to maximumusenet.com and haven't looked back. So now I can read 50G of articles for their well thought out commentary and in-depth analysis. Helped me complete my mame rom set, all the drm free mp3's and no sneaky mediasentry to worry about!

      Thanks for nothing Comcast.

    16. Re:So? by Gilmoure · · Score: 2, Informative

      Maelstrom X works great. And I was able to find the old Simpson sounds I had on the original version, back in 7.1 days.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    17. Re:So? by 1u3hr · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Seriously, it's just convenient,

      That's the problem. It's too easy. Periodically spammers flood newsgroups -- eg thousands of messages promoting sportshoes, fake Rolexes, etc, etc, -- all posted from Google accounts. Many seem to be based in China, but who knows. The really awful thing is that Google makes no attempt to prevent spam being posted from its servers. If you go to the trouble of reporting spam, maybe a day later the account will be closed. Big deal, they can open a new one in a minute. The spam has already been sent out and again, Google makes no attempt to even filter it out from its own servers. In self-defence, many serious news hosts just block all articles posted from Google.

      Since Google obviously does have anti-spam technology, as used in GMail, many suspect it is deliberately poisoning Usenet to encourage users to switch to "Google Groups", their own forums. I don't really think there is a conspiracy, but they obviously do not give a flying fuck for Usenet as a whole.

      Use it for searching, not posting. There are many cheap and some free news hosts, limited to text news groups, which you can use.

  2. Provided! by Goaway · · Score: 3, Funny

    I gather this is about some kind of service which was provided, huh?

  3. Great! Cheaper service! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    A provider gets paid for connectivity and extra services. As Comcast now discontinues one of their services, I guess the monthly bill gets a bit trimmed as well!

    Or are they really the moneygrabbing bastards they are made out to be?

  4. Mainstream? by thetzar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While it's sad to see universal USENET access go, it's been out of the mainstream for about a decade.

  5. Looks like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    september is finaly over...

    1. Re:Looks like by nbert · · Score: 4, Informative

      To anyone who doesn't get op's statement: Eternal September

      And yes, it's funny.

  6. Bastion? by angahar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Bastion may be too strong a word for a service that most current internet users never used and don't understand. At the same time usenet plays a significant role in the history and development of the internet and it's sad when familiar, original stuff is deprecated or deleted.

  7. Much ado about nothing by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 2, Informative

    Big deal. I'd say that 99% of Usenet users use it for the binary groups and they pay to get those through a provider that carries them. The non-binary groups have mostly been worthless for a long time now and that's all Comcast and similar providers carried. Those who can't live without comp.lang.perl or whatever can pay to get it, if they wish, through one of many providers so it's not like it's impossible to get Usenet now.

    1. Re:Much ado about nothing by nstrom · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually Comcast's usenet service was provided by Giganews, albeit with a 2GB/mo cap. So it wasn't just text groups, they had all the binary groups with excellent retention.

  8. *head explodes* by consonant · · Score: 2, Funny

    First with the cap put on its customers several years ago on amount of traffic provided as part of the customer high-speed package, as of September 16, the service is no longer provided.

    Wtf is that supposed to mean? I have zilch clue on how to parse that.. it seems to have zero correlation with the preceding and following sentences in the summary. I mean seriously, you don't really need a degree in Literature to write 3 decent, interconnected sentences..

  9. Just cut off binaries by houghi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just block any and all binaries (including HTML, thank you). That will bring down the amount of traffic by so much that it is not even relevant anymore. Also the amount of hardware that is needed is so much less.
    The only thing you need to do is add a spam filter and you can have it running on a single machine. Retention of 30 days should be enough.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    1. Re:Just cut off binaries by Fumus · · Score: 2, Informative

      One thing I never can comprehend is why ISPs stop carrying binaries and if they do, they hide it away from users.
      When a user downloads from the ISPs own server, he generates a lot less traffic that if he's using P2P and connecting to thousands of random users.

      Then again. It's probably because they'd get sued for directly hosting illegal content or something similarly ridiculous.

  10. A sad day by canuck57 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It is a sad day when ISPs toss out usenet. Usenet was and still is to a lesser degree what many of of got hooked on. A free, generally not moderated and everyone had access to it. Now, we digress into 1000's of web sites, /. included to exchange ideas. While /. is large enough with a wide audience and is good, most web based boards are horrid, operated by a ego driven owner and never even get my book marks.

    My ISP, Shaw just outsourced usenet to someone who can't keep it running. I guess we too are gut off. And no, the google interface does not cut it.

    1. Re:A sad day by ledow · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As someone who apparently skipped the Usenet generation - I'm actually not surprised and, to be honest, not that bothered. There are other, more important, things which should be phased out (plaintext FTP, plaintext SMTP, plaintext POP3) etc. I've never used Usenet in any significant amount and only ever found it full of more spam than an advertised hotmail account. The etiquette is all other the place (top-posters, multi-group postings etc.) with little to no control for the end user. The bandwidth required is substantial for even a basic set of related groups. And in the end, web-forums are more targetted, more controlled, better moderated, less spamified and more responsible for their content - even if that just means no 7-Zip-RAR'ed-uuencoded binaries.

      The amount of hardware needed to run any effective binary-included news server is nowhere near practical. To be honest, if my ISP had the option, I'd opt-out of Usenet access entirely. If there were even a tiny cash incentive it would help but I know that my ISP has occasional trouble with Usenet and I'd gladly not have the facility available at all. I don't even know the news server address, I don't think I've ever typed it. My ISP are generally regarded as very techinical and open with their technical problems and only occasionally do I hear any users crying foul because the NNTP server has gone down.

      Usenet had its time when the Internet was majority-good. If you want Usenet, travel back in time to then or buy access to it from somewhere with the hardware to provide all the filtering, storage, bandwidth required to provide that service. The rest of us will carry on ignoring it and/or hitting only the occasional link on Google Groups by accident.

    2. Re:A sad day by xaxa · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The bandwidth requirement is quite low for a subscriber: everything is plain text, you download only the articles you want and only once per article (not 0.5MB of HTML like you do here every time you look at a page, plus the stupid avatars on most forums). I don't see how a web forum discussing (say) Atari gaming is any more targetted than comp.gaming.atari (or whatever). OK, you can have subforums, but the groups I used to use had worked that out themselves -- you put '[F]' in the subject if you were discussing some kind of fan meet-up, and '[R]' if something was on-topic, or '[I]' if it was off-topic (irrelevant), there were others. There wasn't much spam compared to the number of posts, and in any case it was simple to set the newsreader to hide any posts without a '[X]' in the subject.

      It was great when I had metered dial up to download all the new posts (a couple of minutes), disconnect, read and reply at my leisure, then connect to upload my posts.

      I looked again recently, and the groups that still have users aren't full of spam -- at least, not compared to the number of on-topic posts for every day. There are a lot of dead groups with one or two posts ("is anyone still here?") and 100 spams though.

  11. Fond memories by Dan+East · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have found memories of Usenet from the days before http. Back then there were around 2000 groups, and most of the participants were from academia. It (and IRC) was the first real place I can remember interacting with a global community, and it was quite enjoyable. Of course the self-control and self-regulation that kept the original Usenet usable went out the window as the public at large came online. The original intent of Usenet has been replaced by the online forum. So instead of a central repository of information, all properly categorized and viewable within a consistent client application, we now have the web-based forum. The information is spread far and wide across the internet. The interfaces vary vastly depending on the software and its configuration and theme. The information is spread out across redundant and competing sites. Information can suddenly be lost as a site goes down. Information can be deleted at a whim depending on who is running the site.

    I certainly miss what Usenet once was.

    --
    Better known as 318230.
    1. Re:Fond memories by mcwidget · · Score: 2, Funny

      I have found memories of Usenet from the days before http

      Damn it. I knew I'd left them somewhere.

  12. Does any serious IT geek *not* use usenet? by Viol8 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I mean come on , who wants to waste time searching out some website to post a question or find a discussion when you just need access to a news server and the lot is available immediately.

    Anyone who doesn't use it just because they think its old fashioned and uncool because it doesn't have the "ooh shiny" factor is a blinkered idiot.

    1. Re:Does any serious IT geek *not* use usenet? by xZgf6xHx2uhoAj9D · · Score: 3, Informative

      Agreed. I'll say the "ooh shiny" probably works in FAVOUR of Usenet, too. Modern NNTP clients are flat-out sweet. The way they group threads, group binaries, give previews, actually use native widgets. Much better than some shitty web interface someone has thrown together.

  13. Hi! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    I just got an AOL account. I was told to come here. I have to start my computer and it's asking for the ANY key. My computer didn't com with one. What do I do?

    1. Re:Hi! by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 2, Funny

      Me Too!

      --
      Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
    2. Re:Hi! by demonlapin · · Score: 2, Funny

      Check the cupholder, it's sometimes in there.

  14. Usenet = Useful by prayag · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I still use usenet to ask programming questions. . I have loved to follow discussions on comp.lang.c and comp.std.c. I have learned a lot just looking at the archives. I had recently come across comp.lang.python and am excited about

    I really think usenet still has a place on the web, a very useful place.

    1. Re:Usenet = Useful by nschubach · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It does have it's uses, but like anything risque in society people will try to control and/or ban it for all the wrong reasons.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
  15. And are they going to lower their price? by plazman30 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They've just removed a service from their lineup. A service I used to use all the time when I was on Comcast is now gone.

    It boggles my mind. I was with Comcast back in the @Home days. Back then we had unlimited Usenet, and up to 4 email addresses. Service was 4 Mbits/768Kbits.

    So, then @Home folds, and Comcast takes over the service directly and we go to:

    1 email address
    No Usenet
    1.5 Mbits/128Kbps

    for the same price.

    Now, admittedly, it's gotten better since then. They upped the speed, increased the email addresses and gave you 2 GB on Giganews.

    But now they're going down the path of taking service away. THere's no more Usenet, there's a 250 GB Bandwidth cap (which is plenty of bandwidth, I know...).

    For what they offer for Internet, you should be paying $19.99, and not $55.00.

    Things like this are what makes FIOS so attractive to geeks.

    Andy

  16. Is it clueless day? by Viol8 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "The non-binary groups have mostly been worthless for a long time now"

    Oh really? Which ones? I regularly post on 3 non binary groups and read 2 others and theres plenty of traffic. Perhaps you should try usenet one day instead of blowing smoke out your backside.

    "Those who can't live without comp.lang.perl or whatever can pay to get it,"

    Oh how magnanimus of you. Perhaps you'd like to pay extra to a 3rd party for using the web after you've already paid your ISP for net access too since you're clearly some kid who thinks the web=the internet

  17. isn't this kind of like... by meanmugen · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...removing the full text of the declaration of independence or the constitution or the bill of rights from history textbooks? It's what the internet was founded on, even if it's not used/remembered well. it's still dirt cheap to maintain, too.

    this is just comcast's continuation of cutting corners wherever they can and making the users pay for it.

  18. Re:Working here by plover · · Score: 3, Informative

    RTFA. They're disconnecting it on October 25th.

    --
    John
  19. Anybody want out of their comcast contract? by keraneuology · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is a significant alteration to the service provided and (certainly) comes with no reduction in cost. Somebody who wants out of their Comcast contract and has the requisite tenacity should be able to get out from under them and switch to somebody else.

    --
    If the g'vt kept the data on you that google does you'd better believe you'd be calling it "doing evil"
  20. what's next by jank1887 · · Score: 4, Funny

    soon people will tell me I can't use Gopher anymore.

    1. Re:what's next by Urban+Garlic · · Score: 2, Interesting

      But then you'll lose these!

      Say it ain't so...

      --
      2*3*3*3*3*11*251
  21. linux.kernel by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 3, Funny

    Since the Linux Kernel developers use USENET as the core of their development communications channel, I think declaring USENET obsolete is a bit premature.

    Anyway, this might be the last thing I post, as I have just discovered that bad things can get transferred via HTTP, and so I have to block port 80 ...

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  22. Tinfoil hat time by e-scetic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The USENET is practically the only place on earth everyone can share anonymous (if desired), unmoderated, uncensored, de-centralized discussion on any topic. You can share ideas and ask questions on USENET you can't easily ask anywhere else.

    This is probably the very reason they're shutting it down. I doubt there's any good argument for doing so from a cost-saving perspective.

    This is one more way citizens...err...terrorists can freely communicate.

  23. First Ammendment rights by dpilot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The real problem is that Usenet is the medium which has the greatest claim to rights under the First Ammendment.

    All of the weblogs like Slashdot and such may be prettier, easier to use, and *might* have a higher signal-to-noise (Usenet is even worse than Slashdot, though it doesn't seem possible.) ratio, but they all have an owning party who accepts responsibility for their contents. Usenet is unowned, merely hosted, and therefore comes closest to free speech, in the political sense of the word.

    --
    The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
  24. Re:Less Service for the Same Money by baronvonchickenpants · · Score: 2, Funny

    No. That's Comcastic!

    --
    "The bad machine doesn't know he's a bad machine."
  25. So what. Use another (better) Usenet provider. by decavolt · · Score: 2, Informative

    Comast has restricted groups for some time, and we all knew that this total shutoff of Usenet for Comcast was coming sooner or later.
    So what? Comcast's stripped down Usenet was practically useless anyway.

    Use a service like Easynews.com for Usenet instead. I've been with them for years and they're great.

  26. Really? by hawk · · Score: 2, Funny

    >But every web forum sucks as a web forum,
    >this is a hard and fast rule.

    Really?

    Do you maintain that this would apply to a forum on Microsoft vacuum cleaners? I highly doubt it . . .

    hawkk

  27. it ends October 25th by not_anne · · Score: 2, Informative

    The article summary says...

    "...as of September 16, the service is no longer provided."

    The page linked in the article says...

    "...please be aware that this service will be discontinued on 10/25/2008."

    --
    My comments here are my own; I do not speak for my employer.
  28. Re:Main your stream, dude by Ilgaz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well, the guy who says "Usenet is still relevant" got modded down to "troll", as a way of saying "I don't agree" I think. If another disagreeing guy who really doesn't understand what "Troll" means mods him down -1 one more time, he his "0", the AC level which means his opinion will be effectively censored as most people browses at "1+".

    The abuse on his post alone proves why Usenet must live on.

    The non binary groups doesn't have that much traffic as they are only serving to Usenet's original purpose: Free speech in text without control.