Trn is the client I spent the most time with. The user interfaces of all the clients I just mentioned are text-mode, but that is not the main reason I stopped using them: I continued to use Lynx as my web browser and text-mode Emacs as my editor for many years after giving up on Usenet. Lynx's user interface bothered me a lot less than the others, but Lynx had severe performance problems when I "pointed it at" a busy newsgroup.) I also tried the Usenet reader in Lynx, and in fact that is what I was using when I gave up on Usenet. (I forget if Pine had a Usenet reader in it. I was running Linux at the time, and I thought all of nn, tin, rn, trn and slrn had very bad user interfaces. In fact, the lack of what I considered an acceptable client is what made me stop reading Usenet. You might be interested to hear that not everyone feels that way. >A good threading Usenet client like slrn is pretty much the peak of discussion interfaces. If anything ever happens to YT or Google (they're corporate entities, things tend to go down hill eventually), what will happen to these works? Many may very well disappear from society's grasp.
Youtube would be even more valuable there as there are tons of YT videos in which the original source file probably doesn't even exist anymore.
I personally think should upload their media collection to Usenet just to serve as an extra backup. If you have a digital item you'd like to see preserved indefinitely, a Usenet post (along with other avenues) is a a good start. The few items that make it to Youtube (without the copyright's holders complaints) are able to live on and help serve as items in a 21st century library. There's a lot of copyrighted works that are of value to our society but the content networks just throw them on a tape in a vault somewhere. Granted, takes uploads but they're limited to public domain works or creative commons. Since the major binary providers stopped deleting articles about 4 years ago, Usenet has effectively become a public digital archive.
0 kommentar(er)
