On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 18:39:57 -0600, shineytight@yahoo.com wrote:
>You know, the super stupid nerdy "with-it" folks who use
>Yenc are missing the boat. Why use encoding that MOST folks
>don't necessarily understand? What are you proving to the
>world in general besides you are "super stupid nerdy"?
> You are the descendants of the Wankel rotary generation.
My word does this ever end?
It's been over 3 years people! 3 long years! Yet once again the same
noise by those who fight change and technology..
At this point in time something like 97% of all Usenet binary volume,
(if you can believe GigaNews), is posted via yEnc. It isn't done for
any of these self serving reasons you Luddites come up with, it is
simply an efficient manner for the posting of binaries.
So why is it done? Is it just to keep the OE people in the dark? To
prove something? To demonstrate 'super stupid nerdyness'?
Maybe if you spent less time trying to attack those who provide for
free something to you and more trying to understand their position, as
the providers, you would not take such a pedantic approach.
Every crack group, every warez group, every movie group, every game
group, etc. utilizes yEnc as their posting protocol because in simple
terms a 5% overhead is faster, more efficient and less likely to fail
due to reduced exposure to the hazards of the Internet. It has
nothing to do with trying to prove anything and everything to do with
operating better. It simply makes sense to take 1GB of binaries and
post them over an encapsulation shell of 1.05GB versus 1.40GB being as
the .05 and the .40GB does not offer any value add but overhead. In
the end you still only get 1GB of binary files, so tell me the benefit
of downloading an extra 400MB versus 50MB only to wind up with exactly
the same file when the smoke clears?
Let alone explain to any poster why they should have to upload an
extra 350MB when it in no way enhances the final result?
What is your next rally? Going to go to the motion picture companies
and tell them that you only have VHS machines in your home so they
should stop all this DVD nonsense because it might require change on
your part?
Face the reality! This is something you get for free. The onus is on
you, not the provider, to make it work. I hear these same whines in
the movie groups where different codecs or player formats are being
posted rather than the classic versions. This has been going on since
the late 70's when Usenet started and someone wiz kid figured out that
using XBin BBS protocol he could transfer a binary file in 'text'
over Usenet and have it reassembled on the other end.
Exactly when do you want to pronounce technology must stop? Anyone
with a computer pre-1995 is probably dead in the water now. Shouldn't
we fix them too if we're going to fix people like you?
Utter nonsense.
If all you can manage is point and click then a 1978 TCIP Legacy
system is not for you because despite all the improvements in NNTP
Client software that is what you are using, an old system that hasn't
been upgraded since the mid 1980's. To expect it will work with
simplicity is just childishness... which I firmly expect is not just
an analogy in this case.
You want what we post on Usenet then learn Usenet. And as such using
OE which now has a NNTP engine that is over 8 years old is probably
not going to cut it. There are lots of free alternatives available.
AND NO! The majority of NNTP users do NOT use OE, maybe the majority
of NNTP morons, but not users.
A good trick would be to add a filter where anything yEnc is
deleted... I'm sure the 3% of binary posts of all of Usenet is all you
need anyway.
Stomp
PS: AC I see that you, as I predicted, turned to the dark side, isn't
reality a bitch!
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
|