News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Usenet – Let's Return to Public Spaces. Parent comment

Re:Usenet – Let's Return to Public Spaces by crankylinuxuser on Thursday February 13, 2020 @09:58AM (#22318175)
The problem is that binaries are transferred in a non-binary manner. Base64 was the preferred way. Except it was also used to push images back and forth as well for pertinent conversations.

For any method of communication, you can transfer content that someone else tries to prevent.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Usenet – Let's Return to Public Spaces by chalst on Thursday February 13, 2020 @10:10AM (#22318270)
Upper bounds on per-user bandwidth would work. Implementing this is nontrivial, but it's an essentially easier problem than spam.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Usenet – Let's Return to Public Spaces by shadowgovt on Thursday February 13, 2020 @10:34AM (#22318493)
Upper bounds on per-user bandwidth would help. Though for significant messages, one still has sock-puppet accounts (or aggregates of like-minded individuals with copies of the source message pooling their resources). And, of course, upper bounds create knock-on restrictions (should the system be allowed to transmit public-domain large-volume data? A bandwidth limit blocks that "valid" use too).

It's fun to game-theory how such limits can be broken.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Usenet – Let's Return to Public Spaces by kick on Thursday February 13, 2020 @10:18AM (#22318332)
Who cares about piracy? It exists over HTTP, too, and in a far greater volume than a modern USENET-equivalent could ever hope to achieve, and it's not like ISPs need to be sucked up to anymore: they've already taken their ball and went home on this matter, proverbially-speaking.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Usenet – Let's Return to Public Spaces by ape4 on Friday February 14, 2020 @11:42PM (#22333321)
They were uuencoded. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uuencoding
[ Parent | on HN ]