Cobol - OT - what newsgroup NNTP server to use

Author

OT - what newsgroup NNTP server to use

William M. Klein

2004-09-03, 3:55 am

Having recently switched my ISP, I am now using "giganews" for my newsgroup nntp
provider. (I have a perfectly fine newsgroup reader). It seems to be missing
"more than the usual" number of posts and even entire newsgroups.

I think this has been asked before, but does anyone have any specific GOOD
(rather than just complaints) information on free or inexpensive newsgroup
providers? I looked at "tera news" but seemed to have some problem getting on
to their "free" service.

--
Bill Klein
wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com

Frederico Fonseca

2004-09-03, 3:55 am

On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 18:40:23 -0500, "William M. Klein"
<wmklein@nospam.netcom.com> wrote:

>Having recently switched my ISP, I am now using "giganews" for my newsgroup nntp
>provider. (I have a perfectly fine newsgroup reader). It seems to be missing
>"more than the usual" number of posts and even entire newsgroups.
>
>I think this has been asked before, but does anyone have any specific GOOD
>(rather than just complaints) information on free or inexpensive newsgroup
>providers? I looked at "tera news" but seemed to have some problem getting on
>to their "free" service.
I have been using News.Individual.NET for a long time now. No
problems, and posts do show up very quickly.

And it is free. No Binaries though if this matters to you.

Frederico Fonseca
ema il: frederico_fonseca at syssoft-int.com

Jeff York

2004-09-03, 8:55 am

Frederico Fonseca <real-email-in-msg-spam@email.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 18:40:23 -0500, "William M. Klein"
><wmklein@nospam.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>I have been using News.Individual.NET for a long time now. No
>problems, and posts do show up very quickly.

Seconded.. :-)

--
Jeff. Ironbridge, Shrops, U.K.
jjy@jakfield.xu-netx.com (remove the x..x round u-net for return address)
and don't bother with ralf4, it's a spamtrap and I never go there.. :)

.... "There are few hours in life more agreeable
than the hour dedicated to the ceremony
known as afternoon tea.."

Henry James, (1843 - 1916).

Robert Wagner

2004-09-03, 8:55 am

On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 18:40:23 -0500, "William M. Klein"
<wmklein@nospam.netcom.com> wrote:

>Having recently switched my ISP, I am now using "giganews" for my newsgroup nntp
>provider. (I have a perfectly fine newsgroup reader). It seems to be missing
>"more than the usual" number of posts and even entire newsgroups.
>
>I think this has been asked before, but does anyone have any specific GOOD
>(rather than just complaints) information on free or inexpensive newsgroup
>providers? I looked at "tera news" but seemed to have some problem getting on
>to their "free" service.

Many first-rate ISPs are configued with no NNTP security. When I
connect to news.optonline.com, it doesn't ask for authentication.

SkippyPB

2004-09-03, 3:55 pm

On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 18:40:23 -0500, "William M. Klein"
<wmklein@nospam.netcom.com> enlightened us:

>Having recently switched my ISP, I am now using "giganews" for my newsgroup nntp
>provider. (I have a perfectly fine newsgroup reader). It seems to be missing
>"more than the usual" number of posts and even entire newsgroups.
>
>I think this has been asked before, but does anyone have any specific GOOD
>(rather than just complaints) information on free or inexpensive newsgroup
>providers? I looked at "tera news" but seemed to have some problem getting on
>to their "free" service.

I've been using Airnews (http://www.airnews.net/products/index.html)
for many years and except for a few instances of problems with binary
groups, they have been solid. If you are only interested in text
groups (like this one), then their classic service at 9.95 a month is
more than sufficient especailly if you have broadband access.

Regards,

////
(o o)
-oOO--(_)--OOo-

"It takes only one drink to get me drunk.
The trouble is, I can't remember if it's
the thirteenth or the fourteenth."
-- George Burns
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Remove nospam to email me.

Steve

Robert Wagner

2004-09-03, 3:55 pm

On 3 Sep 2004 08:30:43 -0400, docdwarf@panix.com wrote:

>In article <04ngj01c9kb2hdn1arq0fk2k5ngv1b95hq@4ax.com>,
>Robert Wagner <robert@wagner.net.yourmammaharvests> wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>
>Mr Wagner, leaving aside how 'one' becomes 'many' - in a manner similar,
>perhaps to dictionary-errors - it might be an interesting exercise to
>construct a chain of logic which begins with the assertion:
>
>'A first-rate ISP employs first-rate security methods.'

A first-rate ISP is more interested in providing service to its
customers than answering support calls about connection failures.

A second-rate ISP worries about unauthorized use of bandwidth, then
spends more money administering userids than it could possibly save.

A third-rate ISP is a self-appointed 'data cop' who thinks
public-domain information needs to be secured.

There are technical issues about ease of administering NNTP. It's a
dream on IIS. On Apache, the NNTP server is typically a bunch of buggy
Perl scripts.

By coincidence, I'm currently developing Web server administration
tools with remote access via HTML .. 100% in Cobol. If you want to
talk in detail about administering security in Hamster and Radius, I'm
all ears.

>... and concludes:
>
>'optonline.com is not a first-rate ISP.'

Your piercing logic, wielded with slingshot precision, concludes that
CableVision, the Goliath of the US cable industry, is less than
first-rate. The other Philistines are trembling out of fear they'll be
your next target.

docdwarf@panix.com

2004-09-03, 3:55 pm

In article <ge2hj0pekrjpmbii96theqmng2gks8d8cm@4ax.com>,
Robert Wagner <robert@wagner.net.yourmammaharvests> wrote:
>On 3 Sep 2004 10:48:17 -0400, docdwarf@panix.com wrote:
>
>
>Because first-rate security for apache newsservers does not exist.

And that would prevent it from using a newsserver other than Apache...
how?

>
>In the case of an apache newsserver, the best security is none.

If this s true then it might be concluded that using no security is the
same as using first-rate security.

[snip]

>
>Argument from authority is _valid_, not fallacious, provided the
>authority really is an expert.

You did not call CableVision an expert, Mr Wagner, you called it a
Goliath.

>
>
>Yes, that's possible.

Good of you to grant this.

>The old General Telephone comes to mind. Take a
>look at cablevision.com and judge for yourself whether it looks
>shoddy. If you read unbiased ISP user satisfaction surveys, you'll
>find OptOnline is number one.

Ummmmm... argumentum ad populum has been found in the same class as
argumentum ad verecundiam, Mr Wagner; that class is called 'common logical
fallacies'.

DD

Warren Simmons

2004-09-04, 3:55 am

Works fine for me.

Warren

James J. Gavan wrote:

> William M. Klein wrote:
>
> I'm still using Netscape with Mozilla. I haven't dared make the switch
> - yet. But there is a separate copy of Mozilla, apparently independent
> of Netscape. I was referred to it by my ISP - the tecchie thought it was
> superior.
>
> Jimmy

Robert Wagner

2004-09-04, 3:55 am

On 3 Sep 2004 13:16:23 -0400, docdwarf@panix.com wrote:

>In article <ge2hj0pekrjpmbii96theqmng2gks8d8cm@4ax.com>,
>Robert Wagner <robert@wagner.net.yourmammaharvests> wrote:
[color=darkred]
>
>And that would prevent it from using a newsserver other than Apache...
>how?

Linux is the operating system; apache is a Web server; the newsserver
is an add-on.

Choices:
... Write (or find) a newsserver with good security.
It's not worth the effort.
... Go to another Web server
As a practical matter, there aren't any (for Unix).
... Go to another operating system
The other one is Windows. Everyone loves to hate Microsoft.

>
>If this is true then it might be concluded that using no security is the
>same as using first-rate security.

Bingo. That's what I tried to say.

>
>You did not call CableVision an expert, Mr Wagner, you called it a
>Goliath.

Whatever. Big implies authority, which in turn implies expert.

>Ummmmm... argumentum ad populum has been found in the same class as
>argumentum ad verecundiam, Mr Wagner; that class is called 'common logical
>fallacies'.

You need to re-read your logic primer. Here's a flash card:

ARGUMENTUM AD VERECUNDIAM

The Appeal to Authority uses the admiration of the famous to try and
win support for an assertion. For example:

"Isaac Newton was a genius and he believed in God."

This line of argument is not always completely bogus; for example,
reference to an admitted authority in a particular field may be
relevant to a discussion of that subject. We can distinguish quite
clearly between:

"Stephen Hawking has concluded that black holes give off radiation"
and
"John Searle has concluded that it is impossible to build an
intelligent computer"

Hawking is a physicist, and so we can reasonably expect his opinions
on black hole radiation to be informed. Searle is a linguist, so it
is questionable whether he is well-qualified to speak on the subject
of machine intelligence.

Robert Wagner

2004-09-04, 8:55 pm

On 4 Sep 2004 08:46:33 -0400, docdwarf@panix.com wrote:

>See above, Mr Wagner, about how 'giant' implies 'peanut-sized brain'...
>and remember how many 'giant' organisations will say that a component of
>a healthy diet is meat.

In the past, people ate junk food as a snack and fealt guilty. Now,
McDonalds has convinced them junk food is a reasonable main course ..
and set American cuisine back 100 years. Their defense is 'We didn't
twist their arm, we just gave them what they wanted.' Sure.

During a TV interview, Bill Gates said "Microsoft is just another
software company. We put our software in a box and put that on a
retail shelf. People are free to buy ours, someone else's or nothing
at all. The software industry is free enterprise at its best."

If you believe that, I have an attractive bridge ...

Richard

2004-09-05, 3:55 am

Robert Wagner <robert@wagner.net.yourmammaharvests> wrote

> Searle is a linguist, so it
> is questionable whether he is well-qualified to speak on the subject
> of machine intelligence.

Are you now saying that only those who can show qualifications in a
particular subject should be allowed to speak on that subject ?
;-)

Robert Wagner

2004-09-05, 3:55 am

On 4 Sep 2004 12:37:12 -0700, riplin@Azonic.co.nz (Richard) wrote:

>Robert Wagner <robert@wagner.net.yourmammaharvests> wrote
>
>
>Are you now saying that only those who can show qualifications in a
>particular subject should be allowed to speak on that subject ?
>;-)

The corollary explains why ad hominem is a fallacy of relevance.

If an authority presents facts, his authority gives credence to those
facts. If he also presents his interpretation of those facts then his
character and decision-making skills are legitimately open to
question. They are relevant because his character was a premise to his
argument.

If a person claiming no authority presents an argument, his character
is irrelevant because it wasn't part of his argument. For instance,
suppose I presented an argument concluding that rounding is
inaccurate. Suppose someone responded 'You can't believe anything
Wagner says. He cheats on his taxes and has been divorced six times.'
That would be wrong .. not because it's discourteous, but because it's
irrelevant. Even if the tax and divorce facts were true, they would
still be irrelevant.

Now suppose the retort was 'You told us foo was broken last w

. You
were wrong. You told us bar was broken the w

before. That too was
wrong. Therefore, everything you say is wrong.' That response contains
TWO fallacies -- irrelevance, as described above, and hasty
generalization. The latter occurs when one forms a general rule by
examining only a few specific cases which are not representative of
all possible cases. It is an error of induction. For example:

'I've seen three dogs that had spots, therefore all dogs have spots.'

Hasty generalization can also occur when a statistical sample is
deliberately biased, by including cases that support the conclusion
while ignoring cases that oppose it. For example, citing two errors
while ignoring ten valid points.

A variant of biasing is statistical special pleading, which occurs
when the interpretation of the relevant statistic is "massaged" by
looking for ways to reclassify or requantify data from one portion of
results, but not applying the same scrutiny to other categories. For
example:

'Studies have shown that 5% of patients with foobar disease die within
a year. We have shown that when patients are treated with supermed,
only 3% of non-smokers aged 30 or younger die within a year. Therefore
supermed is an effective treatment. '

Logical fallacies occur most often when a person starts with a
conclusion and, working backward, constructs an argument supporting
it.

docdwarf@panix.com

2004-09-05, 3:55 am

In article <fvujj0lucoqmp3hvp6kgb9vv59vd817b5e@4ax.com>,
Robert Wagner <robert@wagner.net.yourmammaharvests> wrote:
>On 4 Sep 2004 08:46:33 -0400, docdwarf@panix.com wrote:
>
>
>
>In the past, people ate junk food as a snack and fealt guilty. Now,
>McDonalds has convinced them junk food is a reasonable main course ..
>and set American cuisine back 100 years. Their defense is 'We didn't
>twist their arm, we just gave them what they wanted.' Sure.

But McDonald's is a giant organisation, Mr Wagner... didn't someone here
say that such a status implies expertise?

DD

docdwarf@panix.com

2004-09-05, 3:55 am

In article <rc7kj0tb75jtm1qvi1kvg3dm1bstplq7ro@4ax.com>,
Robert Wagner <robert@wagner.net.yourmammaharvests> wrote:
>On 4 Sep 2004 12:37:12 -0700, riplin@Azonic.co.nz (Richard) wrote:
>
>
>The corollary explains why ad hominem is a fallacy of relevance.

[snip]

>Now suppose the retort was 'You told us foo was broken last w

. You
>were wrong. You told us bar was broken the w

before. That too was
>wrong. Therefore, everything you say is wrong.' That response contains
>TWO fallacies -- irrelevance, as described above, and hasty
>generalization.

Perhaps neither, Mr Wagner... consider the principle (not fallacy) of
'falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus' and temper it a bit with the fable (in
the sense of 'A usually short narrative making an edifying or cautionary
point', http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=fable&db=* ) about 'The
Boy Who Cried Wolf'.

DD

Frederico Fonseca

2004-09-08, 8:55 am

docdwarf@panix.com

2004-09-09, 3:55 pm

In article <04ngj01c9kb2hdn1arq0fk2k5ngv1b95hq@4ax.com>,
Robert Wagner <robert@wagner.net.yourmammaharvests> wrote:

[snip]

>Many first-rate ISPs are configued with no NNTP security. When I
>connect to news.optonline.com, it doesn't ask for authentication.

Mr Wagner, leaving aside how 'one' becomes 'many' - in a manner similar,
perhaps to dictionary-errors - it might be an interesting exercise to
construct a chain of logic which begins with the assertion:

'A first-rate ISP employs first-rate security methods.'

.... and concludes:

'optonline.com is not a first-rate ISP.'

DD

Warren Simmons

2004-09-09, 3:55 pm

Robert Wagner

2004-09-09, 3:55 pm

Dave

2004-09-09, 8:55 pm

"Frederico Fonseca" <real-email-in-msg-spam@email.com> wrote in message
news:6l4gj0p1s04h6tps55ob4q3vi48vdhi6gj@
4ax.com...
> On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 18:40:23 -0500, "William M. Klein"
> <wmklein@nospam.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> I have been using News.Individual.NET for a long time now. No
> problems, and posts do show up very quickly.
>
> And it is free. No Binaries though if this matters to you.
>
>
I am also using News.Individual.Net. Seems to work okay...

Robert Wagner

2004-09-10, 3:55 am

On 3 Sep 2004 10:48:17 -0400, docdwarf@panix.com wrote:

>In article <jrtgj09akrg7nbcl4kbmd5kldv8efvvno4@4ax.com>,
>Robert Wagner <robert@wagner.net.yourmammaharvests> wrote:
>
>And that would prevent it from employing first-rate security methods...
>how?

Because first-rate security for apache newsservers does not exist.

In the case of an apache newsserver, the best security is none.
Security costs more in customer bad will, support and administration
than it saves. Ya gotta think business and overall functionality.

While we're on the topic, my mailserver quit working last w

. Eudora
couldn't log on to check mail. It could send mail, but not receive.
This happened after (keyword-> ) Netidentity (<-keyword) upgraded to
'new, improved' server software.

Their support people said much had changed in the seven years since my
'97 version of Eudora. Security had improved. I need to upgrade my
reader. It's for my own protection, blah, blah.

First off, there have NOT been many changes in the last seven years,
there has been one. There are five protocols for logging onto a POP3
server: No Security, SSL 2.0 (95), SSL 3.0 (11/96), PCT (10/95), and
TLS 1.0 (99). Aha, I thought, the new server is insisting on a TLS
handshake.

So I install the most current Eudora and configure it for TLS login. I
get a password failure. Next I tell it to use SSL3. A message comes
back: "This server does not support SSL". Huh? Finally I change it to
use no security .. everything in the clear, like the good old days.
Bingo, that works.

The problem was my old Eudora did not have an option for No Security.
It assumed the server was minimally competent. I was forced to upgrade
because the server had REGRESSED rather than advanced.

Before you twist my words, let me point out I advocated no security
for _newsservers_ on certain Unix platforms. I do NOT advocate
insecure connection for mail on any platform. Dropping security was a
major blunder on their part. Any sniffer on the sixteen hops between
me and them can get my password, delete incoming messages and forge
outgoing. A forged Usenet posting is easily debunked, but a forged
email can do serious damage.

>
>Qualitas, Mr Wagner, non quantitas... is this that 'argument from
>authority' (argumentum ad verecundiam) I've heard so much about?

Argument from authority is _valid_, not fallacious, provided the
authority really is an expert.

>Something can be a Goliath and not apply first-rate security methods.

Yes, that's possible. The old General Telephone comes to mind. Take a
look at cablevision.com and judge for yourself whether it looks
shoddy. If you read unbiased ISP user satisfaction surveys, you'll
find OptOnline is number one. I get >3Mb/s consistantly. Other cable
companies I've used delivered 1Mb/s.

Notice I didn't say most cable companies, although I know that to be
true, nor did I say 'all the others'. I'm learning to write like a ..
Usenet citizen.

Robert Wagner

2004-09-10, 3:55 pm

. You
were wrong. You told us bar was broken the w

docdwarf@panix.com

2004-09-11, 3:55 am

In article <ct6ij0hvjgq51bqpg624pardctfqkg06o1@4ax.com>,
Robert Wagner <robert@wagner.net.yourmammaharvests> wrote:
>On 3 Sep 2004 13:16:23 -0400, docdwarf@panix.com wrote:
>

[snip]
[color=darkred]
>
>Bingo. That's what I tried to say.

Well, it took a while to reach there, Mr Wagner... but it was *such* a
difficult sentiment to express.

>
>
>Whatever. Big implies authority, which in turn implies expert.

Implication is in the mind of the beholder, Mr Wagner; big implies
dinosaur, which in turn implies peanut-sized brain... see how easy it is?

>
>
>You need to re-read your logic primer.

Oh my... is that the 'classism by education' or 'classism by memory of
education?

>Here's a flash card:
>
>ARGUMENTUM AD VERECUNDIAM

[snip]

>This line of argument is not always completely bogus; for example,
>reference to an admitted authority in a particular field may be
>relevant to a discussion of that subject.

See above, Mr Wagner, about how 'giant' implies 'peanut-sized brain'...
and remember how many 'giant' organisations will say that a component of
a healthy diet is meat.

DD

Richard

2004-09-11, 3:55 am

docdwarf@panix.com

2004-09-11, 3:55 am

docdwarf@panix.com

2004-09-11, 3:55 am

. You
>were wrong. You told us bar was broken the w

Dave

2004-09-12, 3:55 pm

Dave

2004-09-16, 3:55 pm

Sponsored Links