• Really? (Was: Screenshots etc.)

    From gazelle@gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) to alt.comp.os.windows-xp,alt.windows7.general,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.msdos.batch.nt on Tue Feb 10 05:03:42 2026
    From Newsgroup: alt.windows7.general

    In article <jb4lokd9i75r8hud0vvcau702llheeojr4@4ax.com>,
    Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:
    ...
    Taking a casual look just now, the biggest *single* post that I see is >2,796,888,255 KB, (about 2.8 TB!), so yeah, size limits aren't a real
    thing.

    Really? Someone posted an almost 3TB post on Usenet? What was it?
    (not looking for a link to the post or anything like that, just curious
    what it was - what could be that big?)
    --
    John Steinbeck: "Socialism never took root in America because the poor
    see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily
    embarrassed millionaires."
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Mr. Man-wai Chang@toylet.toylet@gmail.com to alt.comp.os.windows-xp,alt.windows7.general,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.msdos.batch.nt on Tue Feb 10 13:40:30 2026
    From Newsgroup: alt.windows7.general

    On 2/10/2026 1:03 PM, Kenny McCormack wrote:

    Really? Someone posted an almost 3TB post on Usenet? What was it?
    (not looking for a link to the post or anything like that, just curious
    what it was - what could be that big?)

    Could be an accidental data leak? :)
    --
    @~@ Simplicity is Beauty! Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch!
    / v \ May the Force and farces be with you! Live long and prosper!!
    /( _ )\ https://sites.google.com/site/changmw/
    ^ ^ https://github.com/changmw/changmw
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Paul@nospam@needed.invalid to alt.comp.os.windows-xp,alt.windows7.general,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.msdos.batch.nt on Tue Feb 10 05:59:54 2026
    From Newsgroup: alt.windows7.general

    On Tue, 2/10/2026 12:03 AM, Kenny McCormack wrote:
    In article <jb4lokd9i75r8hud0vvcau702llheeojr4@4ax.com>,
    Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:
    ...
    Taking a casual look just now, the biggest *single* post that I see is
    2,796,888,255 KB, (about 2.8 TB!), so yeah, size limits aren't a real
    thing.

    Really? Someone posted an almost 3TB post on Usenet? What was it?
    (not looking for a link to the post or anything like that, just curious
    what it was - what could be that big?)


    Large objects are broken up into individual messages small enough
    that some transport guarantee between servers is not broken.
    Maybe the Subject of the message says "0001 of 9999 messages".
    We'll see in a moment, whether the server filter rejects my post
    while this content is present. Normally, this material would be a
    trigger for rejection (a binary attempt in a text group).

    =ybegin part=1 line=128 size=87058 name=some.file
    =ypart begin=1 end=87058

    =yend size=87058 part=1 pcrc32=d25faabf

    Lines in USENET usually have a "physical limit" of around 1000 characters. However, by the usage of the USENET line continuation character, it is
    possible to make "virtual" lines which are a lot longer. A poster here,
    as a demo, once sent "a million digits of PI" as a message whose
    header indicated "there was just one line in the file", and that trick
    was achieved via line continuation.

    USENET messages have a finite size, so you must chop images up into pieces
    for transmitting anything large. When using large objects such as 7GB
    movies, you use PAR2 and "transmit PAR blocks", which appear just like
    other messages in your series. For example, if I had "0001 of 9999 messages" perhaps the payload is only 8000 messages plus 1999 PAR blocks. The
    PAR software can then "compensate" for deleted messages (the movie
    people have a BOT which attempts to delete material, which is
    why lots of PAR blocks are needed). It does not matter whether PAR
    blocks or movie blocks are deleted, as long as the 8000 messages
    arrive (8000 or more messages for this movie), the PAR software
    can recover them and make a solid file of appropriate size from the
    result.

    It is claimed (by one binaries poster), that he uploads the same set
    of movies (7GB each) every day, as a total of 1TB of chopped-messages. Naturally, this takes not only a decent ISP connection, it also
    takes the highest account possible on an all-you-can-eat USENET
    binary server (open twenty connections in parallel kind of thing
    as the USENET server is weak on speeds). Such a transmission would
    need PAR blocks, but because virtually the entire transmission could
    be erased by his opponents... he just sends the whole shitload the
    very next day.

    Binary servers claiming "good retention", have to absorb this load.
    Someone has to walk down to the server room and plug in another
    1TB drive :-) But when the materials are deleted, they might handle
    the deletions properly. It's only if that poster had automated
    this and wasn't watching, that retaining 1TB sets from one day to the
    next, could have an impact on the server. But based on the amount the
    person pays per month to do this, the server operator has figured
    out what the retention cost is on average and taken this into account.

    The normal mechanism for cataloging and fetching this stuff, has
    been altered. One server may not have the metadata on board, with the
    intention being to prevent the deletion war. Then the metadata is held
    on some other server, the users then collect the metadata and use
    it on their toolage, to fetch the (undeletable) messages. This is the
    kind of stuff that goes on as you sleep.

    I just pick this stuff up, in passing. Like from a Reddit or the like.
    I'm not interested in Hollywood movies particularly. I haven't turned
    on a TV set here, in some years. The last time I watched "prime time TV",
    and looked at the plot, my conclusion was "some stoner wrote this", the
    plot was that bad. That's prime time for you. Imagine what "The View"
    must be like at 10AM in the morning <shudder>.

    If your USENET client does not have the toolage for the handling of
    segmented binary payloads, then reassembly by hand is a bore. Even relatively small collections of messages, have missing ones, and unless the person
    uses PAR, many times you may find a message or two is missing which you
    might need to make the solid file. 1,2,5,6,7 <dammit>.

    The howardknight server was ruined, when some clever person figured out
    they could upload movies and then "howard would be their server" and
    serve messages (under automation) to the audience. The admin at howard
    added code to truncate long messages (regardless of content!), which is
    why after that time, you could not rely on howard for literal copies of
    what was said on USENET. And howard is down now, and likely "for the count".
    I don't think anyone will fix it now. The prompt here, still works, but the backend is broken.

    https://al.howardknight.net/

    Paul
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Char Jackson@none@none.invalid to alt.comp.os.windows-xp,alt.windows7.general,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.msdos.batch.nt on Tue Feb 10 11:55:02 2026
    From Newsgroup: alt.windows7.general

    On Tue, 10 Feb 2026 05:03:42 -0000 (UTC), gazelle@shell.xmission.com
    (Kenny McCormack) wrote:

    In article <jb4lokd9i75r8hud0vvcau702llheeojr4@4ax.com>,
    Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:
    ...
    Taking a casual look just now, the biggest *single* post that I see is >>2,796,888,255 KB, (about 2.8 TB!), so yeah, size limits aren't a real >>thing.

    Really? Someone posted an almost 3TB post on Usenet? What was it?
    (not looking for a link to the post or anything like that, just curious
    what it was - what could be that big?)

    The Subject is "Retrobat.Ultimate.Racing.Build", which means nothing to
    me. I'm not going to download it to see. :)

    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Paul@nospam@needed.invalid to alt.comp.os.windows-xp,alt.windows7.general,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.msdos.batch.nt on Tue Feb 10 14:01:41 2026
    From Newsgroup: alt.windows7.general

    On Tue, 2/10/2026 12:55 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
    On Tue, 10 Feb 2026 05:03:42 -0000 (UTC), gazelle@shell.xmission.com
    (Kenny McCormack) wrote:

    In article <jb4lokd9i75r8hud0vvcau702llheeojr4@4ax.com>,
    Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:
    ...
    Taking a casual look just now, the biggest *single* post that I see is
    2,796,888,255 KB, (about 2.8 TB!), so yeah, size limits aren't a real
    thing.

    Really? Someone posted an almost 3TB post on Usenet? What was it?
    (not looking for a link to the post or anything like that, just curious
    what it was - what could be that big?)

    The Subject is "Retrobat.Ultimate.Racing.Build", which means nothing to
    me. I'm not going to download it to see. :)


    https://www.arcadepunks.com/3tb-ultimate-racing-retrobat-build-by-nuclear_fused/

    "For a taste of the scale, the build includes 114 PS2 racing games,
    100 PS3 racing games, 66 Windows racing games, and 195 Nintendo Switch racing titles."

    "Recommended hardware baseline

    This build was originally run on an Intel i5 9400F system
    with 12GB RAM and an NVIDIA GTX 1660."

    "Controller and wheel notes

    The build is initially set up for controller use and was tested with an
    8BitDo Pro 2. It has also been used with a Logitech G29 wheel..."

    "Critical setup notes

    Drive letter must be set to R: for everything to work correctly
    Add antivirus exclusions for the drive to prevent false positives and launch issues <=== <cough>
    "

    Paul
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2