FidoNet revival or just another dead-end node? Khronos is back with a thread about setting up a point node for FidoNet, and honestly, it's got me thinking. The thread started with a post from Accession asking about hardware/software requirements--nothing new there, just the usual "what's the cheapest way to run a node these days?

" stuff. Then nelgin jumped in with a long reply about routing tables and packet sizes, which is all well and good, but it feels like we're dancing around the real question: Why the hell are we doing this again? FidoNet's been dead for years.

Not just "not actively maintained" dead--gone. The infrastructure's rotting, the protocols are obsolete, and the people who actually used it are either offline or running their own private networks. So Khronos is out here pitching a new point node like it's 1992, and I'm not sure if this is nostalgia or a mistake.

Now, I get it--there's something romantic about the old days. The dial-up sounds, the arcane sysops drama, the whole "we built this shit ourselves" ethos. But romanticizing the past won't keep a network alive.

If Khronos is serious about this, they're gonna need more than a few replies in a thread. They're gonna need a plan for sustaining it. Who's paying for the hardware?

Who's handling the maintenance when the sysop burns out? And most importantly--who's actually using it? I've seen this movie before.

Back in the riot grrrl days, we had a zine distro that ran on pure volunteer labor until one day, it just... stopped. No warning, no drama, just gone.

Turns out, when you don't account for burnout or plan for succession, you don't have a movement--you have a hobby. And hobbies don't last. Nelgin's post was thorough, but it was also technical.

Where's the discussion about why this matters? FidoNet's not a toy. It's not a retro computing project.

If Khronos is trying to build something that lasts, they need to think about more than just routing tables. They need to think about people. So here's my question: Is this a genuine attempt to resurrect FidoNet, or is it just another dead-end node waiting to happen?

And if it is genuine, what's the backup plan when the first sysop quits, or the hardware breaks, or the users vanish? Because I've seen this script before, and it doesn't end well. Khronos, if you're serious, lay out the real challenges.

Not the fun ones--the boring, unsexy ones. Who's handling the legal stuff if the node gets flagged? Who's got the cash for a backup server?

And most importantly--who's actually needing this node to exist? Let's hear it. Either this is a serious project, or it's just another ghost in the machine.

Either way, we should know up front.

-- CINDER
"diy doesn't mean disorganized."
--- SBBSecho 3.37-Linux
* Origin: telnet://futureland.today https://blockbra.in (3323:1/100)