On Sun, 01 May 2005 18:47:50 +0000, Soque (Enjoque) Pupette wrote:
> jet wrote:
>> In article <d51ndh$nsv$1@herekittykitty.databasix.com>, "Soque (Enjoque) Pupette" <soque@databasix.com> wrote:
>>> jet wrote:
>>> > In article <d51i98$lk4$7@herekittykitty.databasix.com>, God wrote:
>>> >> On Sun, 01 May 2005 03:20:11 GMT, jet@untool.net (jet) wrote:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> >> >Why don't they go post in the alt.binaries.youth-and-beauty.* and
>>> >> >alt.binaries.aoi with the rest of the child porn traders? They've been
>>> >> >the accepted kiddie porn groups for as long as I can remember. That's
>>> >> >what they're -for-. Even alt.fan.air would do, if the prefer stealth
>>> >> >binaries.
>>> >>
>>> >> Unacceptable. afa is not a binaries group, stealth or otherwise.
>>> >
>>> > You are incorrect. Alt.fan air, along with alt.fan.prettyboy,
>>> > alt.oyp.sworp and alt.svens have been stealth child porn groups
>>> > since at least 1998 and most of the alt.fan.*, alt.als.* and
>>> > alt.mag.* hierarchies are considered general stealth binaries
>>> > hierarchies.
>>>
>>> Are you saying that binaries in those groups and hierarchies
>>> are not misplaced? If so, I worry about the scaleability issues
>>> that arise from a policy that condones stealth binary groups.
>>>
>> I don't think I said there was a "policy that condones stealth binary
>> groups". The word "stealth" might indicate the opposite.
>
> And the word "misplaced" might indicate that the binaries belong
> in binary groups.
>
>> It's just that
>> it's been common knowledge that those particular groups are stealth binary
>> kiddie porn groups for many years and collectors subscribe to servers
>> that don't filter the binaries.
>
> I'm not trying to make this point from the view of the collectors.
> I'm looking at it from an _operational_ standpoint. Specifically,
> I'm considering the impact of misplaced binaries (regardless of
> content) on non-binary news sites.
>
>>
>>> How many stealth binary groups does a text-only newsadmin have
>>> to consider in their configs to effectively manage their
>>> bandwidth and spool space?
>>
>> I would imagine a text only server 'clean-feeds' out all binaries, no
>> matter where they occur.
>
> Filtering binaries after receiving them is sub-optimal from a
> bandwidth management perspective. It's far more efficient for the
> peers not to feed the text-only news sites binaries in the first
> place. A news site that offers non-binary feeds needs to specify
> which sub-hierarchies to exclude from the feed. Using the "!" symbol
> to indicate negation, the config line might contain somehting like:
>
> alt.*,!alt.binaries.*
>
> but, if it's necessary to add !alt.mag.*,!alt.fan.*,!alt.als.* plus
> a splattering of single groups and add new (misplaced binary) groups
> as they appear then there is extra administrative overhead to
> endure as text sites ask their peers to adjust their config.
>
> Plus, with this config, the other (text) users in those sub-hierarchies
> that aren't in a misplaced binary group suffer inhibited propagation
> to text sites.
>
> I submit that misplaced binaries have an adverse impact on propagation
> (a core operational consideration) for _other_ (text) users.
>
>> TMK, nobody is issuing bin-cancels outside of
>> the Big 8, anymore.
>>
>> I'm sure someone in policy could give you a better answer, or you could
>> look up the previous discussions. <shrug>
>
> I've seen the discussions. I'm countering (in a content neutral
> manner) your argument that these misplaced binaries should
> be allowed because they've been doing it for a long time.
Jet has been known in the past to support abuse of Usenet at the core
level. Her position on allowing the abuse to continue because it's been
going on for a long time doesn't surprise me. It's a terrible thing for
text only services with limited resources to have to shuffle things
around to compensate for the 1000% increase in storage and bandwidth
requirements regardless of the content.
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
|