As mentioned in Carlos' references, the age check facility will be
provided by an independent organization (probably government
controlled).
The social media platform just sends a request to this
facility asking whether or not the prospective user has the required
minimum age and gets back a yes/no indication.
The platform does not get a name or the actual age or any other information. They get what they need (yes/no), nothing more.
We - in The Netherlands - already have a similar system for different purposes, so yes it can be done.
Of course the 'social media' companies - and especially their rabid
owners - pretend that such a system is not possible, so they have a
'reason' for continuing spreading their bile, influencing politics, elections, supporting extreme anti-democratic parties, etc., etc..
s|b <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
On Thu, 5 Feb 2026 13:48:05 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-02-01 09:21, Daniel70 wrote:
Cross-posted to Linux and Win-11 NGs
As may here would be aware, last December, the Australian Government
brought in Legislation to limit the access to "Social Media" for those >>>> under 16 years of age.
Spain just announced (in the Dubai Summit) it is going to do the same.8< snip >8
The companies, like X, must actually ensure the age of the person before >>> granting access. Method not specified, but clicking somewhere is not
accepted as valid check.
This is not "to protect the children" as they claim. Children still get
access by VPN or even by putting make-up on their face to look older
(this is proven to fool the age detection) or by using their parent's
account with their approval.
The funny thing is that the companies behind the social media have to
adapt and do the age check. So even more personal data is sent to them.
Crazy!
As mentioned in Carlos' references, the age check facility will be provided by an independent organization (probably government
controlled). The social media platform just sends a request to this
facility asking whether or not the prospective user has the required
minimum age and gets back a yes/no indication.
The platform does not get a name or the actual age or any other information. They get what they need (yes/no), nothing more.
We - in The Netherlands - already have a similar system for different purposes, so yes it can be done.
Of course the 'social media' companies - and especially their rabid owners - pretend that such a system is not possible, so they have a
'reason' for continuing spreading their bile, influencing politics, elections, supporting extreme anti-democratic parties, etc., etc..
On Fri, 6 Feb 2026 03:07:25 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Yesterday, on the radio they were commenting on X refusing to identify
who says what. Freedom of speech, they say. Well, the justice system of
Brasil ordered the people that helped the coup de etat attempt menacing
on X be identified. X refused. The president menaced X be banned from
brasil. X was angry and menaced Brasil, but at the end, they had to give
in. Three hundred people revealed is less than losing an entire country
to the network. Lots of revenue lost. More or less this is the summary,
inaccuracies are expected, my memory is not perfect.
Would you say the same if they were brave antifas trying to overthrow Bolsonaro?
On 6/02/2026 7:43 am, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-02-05 15:13, s|b wrote:
On Thu, 5 Feb 2026 13:48:05 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-02-01 09:21, Daniel70 wrote:8< snip >8
Cross-posted to Linux and Win-11 NGsSpain just announced (in the Dubai Summit) it is going to do the same. >>>> The companies, like X, must actually ensure the age of the person
As may here would be aware, last December, the Australian Government >>>>> brought in Legislation to limit the access to "Social Media" for those >>>>> under 16 years of age.
before
granting access. Method not specified, but clicking somewhere is not
accepted as valid check.
This is not "to protect the children" as they claim. Children still get
access by VPN or even by putting make-up on their face to look older
(this is proven to fool the age detection) or by using their parent's
account with their approval.
Parents here are asking for this. It is hard to prohibit your kid to
access the phone, "because all my friends have it". When it is
prohibited for everybody, it is easier. Nobody has access.
And, if the Parents then end up with troubled kids, they (the parents)
have no one to blame but themselves.
"My little Darlings wouldn't do THAT!!"
On 6 Feb 2026 12:17:00 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
As mentioned in Carlos' references, the age check facility will be
provided by an independent organization (probably government
controlled).
Probably.
The social media platform just sends a request to this
facility asking whether or not the prospective user has the required
minimum age and gets back a yes/no indication.
The platform does not get a name or the actual age or any other
information. They get what they need (yes/no), nothing more.
Tnx for educating me, because that was not how I thought it worked.
We - in The Netherlands - already have a similar system for different
purposes, so yes it can be done.
I can imagine not everyone is happy about it. This system could be
(ab)used to track people, in principle. What if such a system was
hacked?
Of course the 'social media' companies - and especially their rabid
owners - pretend that such a system is not possible, so they have a
'reason' for continuing spreading their bile, influencing politics,
elections, supporting extreme anti-democratic parties, etc., etc..
So they'll probably be fined with a slap on the wrist, a couple million
euro, while raking in millions more in the process.
On 6 Feb 2026 12:17:00 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
As mentioned in Carlos' references, the age check facility will be provided by an independent organization (probably government
controlled).
Probably.
The social media platform just sends a request to this
facility asking whether or not the prospective user has the required minimum age and gets back a yes/no indication.
The platform does not get a name or the actual age or any other information. They get what they need (yes/no), nothing more.
Tnx for educating me, because that was not how I thought it worked.
We - in The Netherlands - already have a similar system for different purposes, so yes it can be done.
I can imagine not everyone is happy about it. This system could be
(ab)used to track people, in principle. What if such a system was
hacked?
Of course the 'social media' companies - and especially their rabid owners - pretend that such a system is not possible, so they have a 'reason' for continuing spreading their bile, influencing politics, elections, supporting extreme anti-democratic parties, etc., etc..
So they'll probably be fined with a slap on the wrist, a couple million
euro, while raking in millions more in the process.
On 2026-02-06 14:37, s|b wrote:
Who knows. Some fines in France are pretty large.
So they'll probably be fined with a slap on the wrist, a couple
million euro, while raking in millions more in the process.
FWIW, I already used/managed a NetNews/Usenet system in the early
80s. Used RFA (Remote File Access) before NFS (Network File System)
even existed and UUCP (Unix-to-Unix Copy) to receive/send articles
from/to other systems. And yes, the user used a *program* (called
'notes' [1])!
On 2026-02-06 11:15, Daniel70 wrote:
On 6/02/2026 7:43 am, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-02-05 15:13, s|b wrote:
On Thu, 5 Feb 2026 13:48:05 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-02-01 09:21, Daniel70 wrote:8< snip >8
Cross-posted to Linux and Win-11 NGsSpain just announced (in the Dubai Summit) it is going to do
As may here would be aware, last December, the Australian
Government brought in Legislation to limit the access to
"Social Media" for those under 16 years of age.
the same. The companies, like X, must actually ensure the age
of the person before granting access. Method not specified,
but clicking somewhere is not accepted as valid check.
This is not "to protect the children" as they claim. Children
still get access by VPN or even by putting make-up on their
face to look older (this is proven to fool the age detection)
or by using their parent's account with their approval.
Parents here are asking for this. It is hard to prohibit your kid
to access the phone, "because all my friends have it". When it is
prohibited for everybody, it is easier. Nobody has access.
And, if the Parents then end up with troubled kids, they (the
parents) have no one to blame but themselves.
"My little Darlings wouldn't do THAT!!"
Why would the kids be troubled because not having social media? I
didn't have them.
Rich people from the California tech valley prohibit their children
from being educated with computers and insist on paper. They would
know!
On 7/02/2026 12:34 am, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-02-06 11:15, Daniel70 wrote:
On 6/02/2026 7:43 am, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-02-05 15:13, s|b wrote:
On Thu, 5 Feb 2026 13:48:05 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-02-01 09:21, Daniel70 wrote:8< snip >8
Cross-posted to Linux and Win-11 NGsSpain just announced (in the Dubai Summit) it is going to do
As may here would be aware, last December, the Australian
Government brought in Legislation to limit the access to
"Social Media" for those under 16 years of age.
the same. The companies, like X, must actually ensure the age
of the person before granting access. Method not specified,
but clicking somewhere is not accepted as valid check.
This is not "to protect the children" as they claim. Children
still get access by VPN or even by putting make-up on their
face to look older (this is proven to fool the age detection)
or by using their parent's account with their approval.
Parents here are asking for this. It is hard to prohibit your kid
to access the phone, "because all my friends have it". When it is
-aprohibited for everybody, it is easier. Nobody has access.
And, if the Parents then end up with troubled kids, they (the
parents) have no one to blame but themselves.
"My little Darlings wouldn't do THAT!!"
Why would the kids be troubled because not having social media? I
didn't have them.
Did the 'other' Social Media exist back then??
--Rich people from the California tech valley prohibit their childrenYeap, they should (and do!!).
from being educated with computers and insist on paper. They would
know!
Cross-posted to Linux and Win-11 NGs
As may here would be aware, last December, the Australian Government
brought in Legislation to limit the access to "Social Media" for those
under 16 years of age.
I heard today that implementation is postponed because they don't knowIN Hong Kong, all mobile phone SIMs must now be registered with a photo
of a feasible method to check age.
On Fri, 6 Feb 2026 15:02:19 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-02-06 14:37, s|b wrote:
Who knows. Some fines in France are pretty large.
So they'll probably be fined with a slap on the wrist, a couple
million euro, while raking in millions more in the process.
Some penalties go by a percentage of revenue. No way that?s not going
to hurt.
On 2/7/2026 8:41 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
I heard today that implementation is postponed because they don't know
of a feasible method to check age.
IN Hong Kong, all mobile phone SIMs must now be registered with a photo
of HKID card. Does Australia have similar ID cards? :)
No, The Aussies just have take part in the method described in the
Spanish references which Carlos posted! EfOe
On 2/7/2026 8:41 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
IN Hong Kong, all mobile phone SIMs must now be registered with a photo
I heard today that implementation is postponed because they don't know
of a feasible method to check age.
of HKID card. Does Australia have similar ID cards? :)
On 2026-02-01 09:21, Daniel70 wrote:
Cross-posted to Linux and Win-11 NGs
As may here would be aware, last December, the Australian Government
brought in Legislation to limit the access to "Social Media" for those
under 16 years of age.
I heard today that implementation is postponed because they don't know
of a feasible method to check age.
On Tue, 3 Feb 2026 12:50:28 +0800, "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> wrote:
There was a bridging program that could sync a Usenet newsgroup to an
Echomail group back then. :)
And Echomail has offline readers, allowing you to post as well.
I first encountered Usenet when some newsgroups were gated to Fidonet,
this one among them.
Most popular offline readers were BlueWave and Silver Xpress. I still
have them on my computer, with some saved messages from 30-35 years
ago.
But is UseNet "Social Media"??
On 2026-02-07 09:57, Daniel70 wrote:
On 7/02/2026 12:34 am, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-02-06 11:15, Daniel70 wrote:
On 6/02/2026 7:43 am, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-02-05 15:13, s|b wrote:
On Thu, 5 Feb 2026 13:48:05 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-02-01 09:21, Daniel70 wrote:8< snip >8
Cross-posted to Linux and Win-11 NGsSpain just announced (in the Dubai Summit) it is going to do
As may here would be aware, last December, the Australian
Government brought in Legislation to limit the access to
"Social Media" for those under 16 years of age.
the same. The companies, like X, must actually ensure the age
of the person before granting access. Method not specified,
but clicking somewhere is not accepted as valid check.
This is not "to protect the children" as they claim. Children
still get access by VPN or even by putting make-up on their
face to look older (this is proven to fool the age detection)
or by using their parent's account with their approval.
Parents here are asking for this. It is hard to prohibit your kid
to access the phone, "because all my friends have it". When it is
-aprohibited for everybody, it is easier. Nobody has access.
And, if the Parents then end up with troubled kids, they (the
parents) have no one to blame but themselves.
"My little Darlings wouldn't do THAT!!"
Why would the kids be troubled because not having social media? I
didn't have them.
Did the 'other' Social Media exist back then??
No mobile phones. No internet. No computers, actually.
--Rich people from the California tech valley prohibit their childrenYeap, they should (and do!!).
from being educated with computers and insist on paper. They would
know!
Lawrence D?Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 6 Feb 2026 15:02:19 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-02-06 14:37, s|b wrote:
Who knows. Some fines in France are pretty large.
So they'll probably be fined with a slap on the wrist, a
couple million euro, while raking in millions more in the
process.
Some penalties go by a percentage of revenue. No way that?s not
going to hurt.
Yep. The EU's announced fine for TikTok (if they do not implement
the required changes) is upto 6% of its total *global* annual
turnover, i.e. not 'just' its EU business.
On 2026-02-01 09:21, Daniel70 wrote:
Cross-posted to Linux and Win-11 NGs
As may here would be aware, last December, the Australian Government
brought in Legislation to limit the access to "Social Media" for those
under 16 years of age.
I heard today that implementation is postponed because they don't know
of a feasible method to check age.
On 2/7/2026 8:41 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
IN Hong Kong, all mobile phone SIMs must now be registered with a photo
I heard today that implementation is postponed because they don't know
of a feasible method to check age.
of HKID card. Does Australia have similar ID cards? :)
On 2/1/2026 4:21 PM, Daniel70 wrote:
But is UseNet "Social Media"??
There is a movie called "Social Network"!! :)
THE SOCIAL NETWORK - Official Trailer [2010] (HD) - YouTube <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lB95KLmpLR4>
If someone (maybe a student from IT) could write bridges or gateways to
sync Usenet with modern social networks like Facebook, Threads, Reddit, etc!! It isn't difficult, right? Because Echomail of Fidonet did it!! :)
On 2/4/2026 10:59 AM, Steve Hayes wrote:
On Tue, 3 Feb 2026 12:50:28 +0800, "Mr. Man-wai Chang"
<toylet.toylet@gmail.com> wrote:
There was a bridging program that could sync a Usenet newsgroup to an
Echomail group back then. :)
And Echomail has offline readers, allowing you to post as well.
I first encountered Usenet when some newsgroups were gated to Fidonet,
this one among them.
Most popular offline readers were BlueWave and Silver Xpress. I still
have them on my computer, with some saved messages from 30-35 years
ago.
If someone (maybe a student from IT) could write bridges or gateways to
sync Usenet with modern social networks like Facebook, Threads, Reddit, etc!! It isn't difficult, right? Because Echomail of Fidonet did it!! :)
If someone (maybe a student from IT) could write bridges or gateways
to sync Usenet with modern social networks like Facebook, Threads,
Reddit, etc!! It isn't difficult, right? Because Echomail of Fidonet
did it!! :)
On Mon, 2/2/2026 6:39 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Modems were never a lot of fun at the best of times.
On 2026-02-08 06:14, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
If someone (maybe a student from IT) could write bridges or gateways to
sync Usenet with modern social networks like Facebook, Threads, Reddit,
etc!! It isn't difficult, right? Because Echomail of Fidonet did it!! :)
Please don't.
Besides, they would have to inject html with media files attached
On Sun, 8 Feb 2026 13:14:32 +0800, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
If someone (maybe a student from IT) could write bridges or gateways
to sync Usenet with modern social networks like Facebook, Threads,
Reddit, etc!! It isn't difficult, right? Because Echomail of Fidonet
did it!! :)
We already had all that spam crap from Google Groups back when they
were gatewaying Usenet, the last thing we need is for the spam crap to
return from a new source.
Yes, I'd like to see that too - and it ought to be an interestingI agree. Usenet is less about personal fame and glory, is more focused
project for a newcomer, and/or someone working with one of the AIs.
However, I suspect the problem is administrative rather than technical. Usenet mostly doesn't "belong" to anyone: granted, the _servers_ do, but
the content is mostly free. Whereas most other "social media" _does_
_belong_ to someone - Meta, Google, or whoever - and they like to
On Sun, 8 Feb 2026 13:14:32 +0800, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
If someone (maybe a student from IT) could write bridges or gateways
to sync Usenet with modern social networks like Facebook, Threads,
Reddit, etc!! It isn't difficult, right? Because Echomail of Fidonet
did it!! :)
We already had all that spam crap from Google Groups back when they
were gatewaying Usenet, the last thing we need is for the spam crap to
return from a new source.
On 2/4/2026 10:59 AM, Steve Hayes wrote:
On Tue, 3 Feb 2026 12:50:28 +0800, "Mr. Man-wai Chang"
<toylet.toylet@gmail.com> wrote:
There was a bridging program that could sync a Usenet newsgroup to an
Echomail group back then. :)
And Echomail has offline readers, allowing you to post as well.
I first encountered Usenet when some newsgroups were gated to Fidonet,
this one among them.
Most popular offline readers were BlueWave and Silver Xpress. I still
have them on my computer, with some saved messages from 30-35 years
ago.
If someone (maybe a student from IT) could write bridges or gateways to
sync Usenet with modern social networks like Facebook, Threads, Reddit, >etc!! It isn't difficult, right? Because Echomail of Fidonet did it!! :)
On 2/9/2026 9:38 AM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 8 Feb 2026 13:14:32 +0800, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
If someone (maybe a student from IT) could write bridges or gateways
to sync Usenet with modern social networks like Facebook, Threads,
Reddit, etc!! It isn't difficult, right? Because Echomail of Fidonet
did it!! :)
We already had all that spam crap from Google Groups back when they
were gatewaying Usenet, the last thing we need is for the spam crap to
return from a new source.
Does Usenet have a general chit-chat newsgroup? Just dump them into it? :)
On 2/9/2026 9:38 AM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 8 Feb 2026 13:14:32 +0800, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
If someone (maybe a student from IT) could write bridges or gateways
to sync Usenet with modern social networks like Facebook, Threads,
Reddit, etc!! It isn't difficult, right? Because Echomail of Fidonet
did it!! :)
We already had all that spam crap from Google Groups back when they
were gatewaying Usenet, the last thing we need is for the spam crap to
return from a new source.
Does Usenet have a general chit-chat newsgroup? Just dump them into it? :)
On 10/02/2026 3:29 am, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
On 2/9/2026 9:38 AM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:Doesn't every thread in every newsgroup go that way ...... if it 'lives' long enough??
On Sun, 8 Feb 2026 13:14:32 +0800, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
If someone (maybe a student from IT) could write bridges or gateways
to sync Usenet with modern social networks like Facebook, Threads,
Reddit, etc!! It isn't difficult, right? Because Echomail of Fidonet
did it!! :)
We already had all that spam crap from Google Groups back when they
were gatewaying Usenet, the last thing we need is for the spam crap to
return from a new source.
Does Usenet have a general chit-chat newsgroup? Just dump them into it? :) >>
On 2026/2/9 1:38:57, Lawrence DAOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 8 Feb 2026 13:14:32 +0800, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
If someone (maybe a student from IT) could write bridges or gateways
to sync Usenet with modern social networks like Facebook, Threads,
Reddit, etc!! It isn't difficult, right? Because Echomail of Fidonet
did it!! :)
We already had all that spam crap from Google Groups back when they
were gatewaying Usenet, the last thing we need is for the spam crap to
return from a new source.
Yes and no; I do agree with what you say, that GG was often a pain. But, >usenet will die on the vine - I doubt it will make 20 years, it might be
less than five - unless it gets _some_ new users.
As I've already posted, I suspect such a gateway won't happen - not for >technical reasons, but for administrative: the individual operators of
the "modern social networks" won't have it, either because they have a >personal objection to the idea, or (to be fair I suspect more likely)
because they anticipate legal trouble if they were to carry material of
such varied (and to some extent untraceable) source[s].
On 2026/2/9 1:38:57, Lawrence D?Oliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 8 Feb 2026 13:14:32 +0800, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
If someone (maybe a student from IT) could write bridges or gateways
to sync Usenet with modern social networks like Facebook, Threads,
Reddit, etc!! It isn't difficult, right? Because Echomail of Fidonet
did it!! :)
We already had all that spam crap from Google Groups back when they
were gatewaying Usenet, the last thing we need is for the spam crap to return from a new source.
Yes and no; I do agree with what you say, that GG was often a pain. But, usenet will die on the vine - I doubt it will make 20 years, it might be
less than five - unless it gets _some_ new users.
On Tue, 2/10/2026 6:57 AM, Daniel70 wrote:
Doesn't every thread in every newsgroup go that way ...... if it
'lives' long enough??
Actually, no.
On Tue, 2/10/2026 6:57 AM, Daniel70 wrote:
On 10/02/2026 3:29 am, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
On 2/9/2026 9:38 AM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:Doesn't every thread in every newsgroup go that way ...... if it 'lives' long enough??
On Sun, 8 Feb 2026 13:14:32 +0800, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
If someone (maybe a student from IT) could write bridges or gateways >>>>> to sync Usenet with modern social networks like Facebook, Threads,
Reddit, etc!! It isn't difficult, right? Because Echomail of Fidonet >>>>> did it!! :)
We already had all that spam crap from Google Groups back when they
were gatewaying Usenet, the last thing we need is for the spam crap to >>>> return from a new source.
Does Usenet have a general chit-chat newsgroup? Just dump them into it? :) >>>
Actually, no.
Notice how some "hierarchies" have very very specific groups.
There is a group for noobs, where you can ask questions about
basics.
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/2/9 1:38:57, Lawrence D?Oliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 8 Feb 2026 13:14:32 +0800, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
If someone (maybe a student from IT) could write bridges or
gateways to sync Usenet with modern social networks like
Facebook, Threads, Reddit, etc!! It isn't difficult, right?
Because Echomail of Fidonet did it!! :)
We already had all that spam crap from Google Groups back when
they were gatewaying Usenet, the last thing we need is for the
spam crap to return from a new source.
Yes and no; I do agree with what you say, that GG was often a pain.
But, usenet will die on the vine - I doubt it will make 20 years,
it might be less than five - unless it gets _some_ new users.
I'm not too optimistic about the longevity of Usenet either, but the
Death of Usenet has already been proclaimed so many times and there
*are* some young(er) posters.
As I mentioned in another thread, one poster in his early twenties
(~25), several from ~42 to ~49 and quite a few to ~70 (including you
:-))
So with the ever increasing life expectancy, we still might have 20--
years of Usenet.
Well, hope springs eternal, doesn't it!? :-)
[...]
On 11/02/2026 1:26 am, Paul wrote:
On Tue, 2/10/2026 6:57 AM, Daniel70 wrote:
On 10/02/2026 3:29 am, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
On 2/9/2026 9:38 AM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:Doesn't every thread in every newsgroup go that way ...... if it 'lives' long enough??
On Sun, 8 Feb 2026 13:14:32 +0800, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
If someone (maybe a student from IT) could write bridges or gateways >>>>>> to sync Usenet with modern social networks like Facebook, Threads, >>>>>> Reddit, etc!! It isn't difficult, right? Because Echomail of Fidonet >>>>>> did it!! :)
We already had all that spam crap from Google Groups back when they
were gatewaying Usenet, the last thing we need is for the spam crap to >>>>> return from a new source.
Does Usenet have a general chit-chat newsgroup? Just dump them into it? :) >>>>
Actually, no.
Notice how some "hierarchies" have very very specific groups.
There is a group for noobs, where you can ask questions about
basics.
I suppose I am suggesting (poorly) that, if there are only about 10 - 12 posts in a thread it would, most likely, be pretty well "On-Topic" but,
if the thread gets to 50-100-or more posts (like THIS thread), with
various branches and twigs, there almost definitely WILL be some drift!!
On 11/02/2026 5:55 am, Frank Slootweg wrote:[...]
I'm not too optimistic about the longevity of Usenet either, but the
Death of Usenet has already been proclaimed so many times and there
*are* some young(er) posters.
How many former "UseNet" (??) posters thought "UseNet" died the day Google-Groups died .... because THAT was THE only way to post to UseNet??
I know of one of the more numerous posters in one of my other Usenet
groups who hasn't been heard of since that day!!
As I mentioned in another thread, one poster in his early twenties
(~25), several from ~42 to ~49 and quite a few to ~70 (including you
:-))
Almost me .... 70 in October!!
On 12/02/2026 2:42 am, Frank Slootweg wrote:[...]
BTW, back to your original question "But is UseNet "Social Media"??":
I remember that when I had to apply for my ESTA [1] [2]'visa' for the US, one of the questions is about Social Media and I filled in this,
just to be on the safe side:
How long ago was this?? I thought Trump only brought in the requirement
in the last twelve months or so.
"SOCIAL MEDIA (OPTIONAL)
Provider / Platform Social Media Identifier Other Platform / Provider
Other FRANK SLOOTWEG USENET"
YES, THE ESTA DATA IS ALL CAPS! :-)
Luckily, I didn't have to show 'Usenet' at entry into the US, because
I only had my phone, so no usable newsreader.
[1] Electronic System for Travel Authorization
[2] Like your eVisitor visa.
I'm not a frequent International Traveller .... Europe/UK back in 1987 (first ever Passport) for my youngest sister's wedding in Scotland and
then Hong Kong/China in 1996 ... so, in theory, I could have 'done' this trip on my first (Ten year) Passport, but HK required I obtain a new Passport. No Problem!
That's it, Two OS trips, Two Passports!!
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 12/02/2026 2:42 am, Frank Slootweg wrote:[...]
BTW, back to your original question "But is UseNet "Social Media"??": >>>
I remember that when I had to apply for my ESTA [1] [2]'visa' for the >>> US, one of the questions is about Social Media and I filled in this,
just to be on the safe side:
How long ago was this?? I thought Trump only brought in the requirement
in the last twelve months or so.
For me, the first time was 2020 (didn't actaully go because of COVID)
and then 2022 (both visting and transiting) and 2023.
It's a longer standing practice, both for the US and other countries, including Australia. But for Australia you don't have to specify it on
your eVisitor application, but might need to show your social media upon entry into Oz.
"SOCIAL MEDIA (OPTIONAL)I'm not a frequent International Traveller .... Europe/UK back in 1987
Provider / Platform Social Media Identifier Other Platform / Provider
Other FRANK SLOOTWEG USENET"
YES, THE ESTA DATA IS ALL CAPS! :-)
Luckily, I didn't have to show 'Usenet' at entry into the US, because >>> I only had my phone, so no usable newsreader.
[1] Electronic System for Travel Authorization
[2] Like your eVisitor visa.
(first ever Passport) for my youngest sister's wedding in Scotland and
then Hong Kong/China in 1996 ... so, in theory, I could have 'done' this
trip on my first (Ten year) Passport, but HK required I obtain a new
Passport. No Problem!
That's it, Two OS trips, Two Passports!!
Not too many overseas trips for me either. Only ~21 to Australia, but who's counting!? :-)
On 7/02/2026 11:40 pm, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-02-07 09:57, Daniel70 wrote:
On 7/02/2026 12:34 am, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-02-06 11:15, Daniel70 wrote:
On 6/02/2026 7:43 am, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-02-05 15:13, s|b wrote:
On Thu, 5 Feb 2026 13:48:05 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-02-01 09:21, Daniel70 wrote:8< snip >8
Cross-posted to Linux and Win-11 NGsSpain just announced (in the Dubai Summit) it is going to do
As may here would be aware, last December, the Australian
Government brought in Legislation to limit the access to
"Social Media" for those under 16 years of age.
the same. The companies, like X, must actually ensure the age
of the person before granting access. Method not specified,
but clicking somewhere is not accepted as valid check.
This is not "to protect the children" as they claim. Children
still get access by VPN or even by putting make-up on their
face to look older (this is proven to fool the age detection)
or by using their parent's account with their approval.
Parents here are asking for this. It is hard to prohibit your kid
to access the phone, "because all my friends have it". When it is
-aprohibited for everybody, it is easier. Nobody has access.
And, if the Parents then end up with troubled kids, they (the
parents) have no one to blame but themselves.
"My little Darlings wouldn't do THAT!!"
Why would the kids be troubled because not having social media? I
didn't have them.
Did the 'other' Social Media exist back then??
No mobile phones. No internet. No computers, actually.
I was using an Apple IIE clone (Brand name ZEUS, I think.) in late 1983
for work purposes .... No Internet connection though!
On 2026-02-08 09:28, Daniel70 wrote:
On 7/02/2026 11:40 pm, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-02-07 09:57, Daniel70 wrote:
On 7/02/2026 12:34 am, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-02-06 11:15, Daniel70 wrote:
And, if the Parents then end up with troubled kids, they (the
parents) have no one to blame but themselves.
"My little Darlings wouldn't do THAT!!"
Why would the kids be troubled because not having social media? I
didn't have them.
Did the 'other' Social Media exist back then??
No mobile phones. No internet. No computers, actually.
I was using an Apple IIE clone (Brand name ZEUS, I think.) in late
1983 for work purposes .... No Internet connection though!
My first PC was an Amstrad PC1512DD (Amstrad_PC1512), so that means 1986
or a bit later.
I lived at a university student residence, so phone was out of the
question till I moved to a flat around 1993
In my situation (1983'ish) I was running the Examination Cell for an Australian Army TaFE Electronics Wing, so Stats were kept on each
question used in End of Subject Exams to determine how HARD each
Question was i.e. how many got each question Correct and then a second
figure compared how many of the Smarties (Top 30%, I think) got it
correct compared to how many of "Dummies" group got the question
correct.
Those two figures, Overall Correct v Difference Correct, where then used
to determine how DIFFICULT each Exam was .... and, if need by, the Marks attained could be adjusted.
STATICS .... made for computers .... or COMPUTERS ... made for statics!!
On 24/02/2026 8:03 pm, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-02-08 09:28, Daniel70 wrote:
On 7/02/2026 11:40 pm, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-02-07 09:57, Daniel70 wrote:
On 7/02/2026 12:34 am, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-02-06 11:15, Daniel70 wrote:
<Snip>
And, if the Parents then end up with troubled kids, they (the
parents) have no one to blame but themselves.
"My little Darlings wouldn't do THAT!!"
Why would the kids be troubled because not having social media? I
didn't have them.
Did the 'other' Social Media exist back then??
No mobile phones. No internet. No computers, actually.
I was using an Apple IIE clone (Brand name ZEUS, I think.) in late
1983 for work purposes .... No Internet connection though!
My first PC was an Amstrad PC1512DD (Amstrad_PC1512), so that means
1986 or a bit later.
I lived at a university student residence, so phone was out of the
question till I moved to a flat around 1993
In my situation (1983'ish) I was running the Examination Cell for an Australian Army TaFE Electronics Wing, so Stats were kept on each
question used in End of Subject Exams to determine how HARD each
Question was i.e. how many got each question Correct and then a second figure compared how many of the Smarties (Top 30%, I think) got it
correct compared to how many of "Dummies" group got the question correct.
Those two figures, Overall Correct v Difference Correct, where then used
to determine how DIFFICULT each Exam was .... and, if need by, the Marks attained could be adjusted.
STATICS .... made for computers .... or COMPUTERS ... made for statics!!--
On 2026-02-24 11:14, Daniel70 wrote:
On 24/02/2026 8:03 pm, Carlos E.R. wrote:
My first PC was an Amstrad PC1512DD (Amstrad_PC1512), so that means
1986 or a bit later.
I lived at a university student residence, so phone was out of the
question till I moved to a flat around 1993
In my situation (1983'ish) I was running the Examination Cell for an
Australian Army TaFE Electronics Wing, so Stats were kept on each
question used in End of Subject Exams to determine how HARD each
Question was i.e. how many got each question Correct and then a second
figure compared how many of the Smarties (Top 30%, I think) got it
correct compared to how many of "Dummies" group got the question correct.
Those two figures, Overall Correct v Difference Correct, where then
used to determine how DIFFICULT each Exam was .... and, if need by,
the Marks attained could be adjusted.
Interesting! No idea that was done.
--STATICS .... made for computers .... or COMPUTERS ... made for statics!!
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 59 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 20:56:04 |
| Calls: | 810 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 1,287 |
| D/L today: |
11 files (21,026K bytes) |
| Messages: | 194,568 |
