### **Request for Discussion: Creation of the ai.* Hierarchy**<snip>
#### **4. Alignment with Existing Hierarchies**comp.* sci.* rec.* are big eight.
`ai.*` fits naturally alongside top-level hierarchies like `comp.*` (computers), `sci.*` (science), and `rec.*` (recreation) as a distinct thematic domain. ItrCOs not a miscellaneous experiment suited for `alt.*`, but a deliberate, structured proposal with clear purpose and growth potential.
Bingo3331 <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in news:m4u2dvFq8dlU1 @mid.individual.net:
### **Request for Discussion: Creation of the ai.* Hierarchy**<snip>
Please don't propose or approve this for global consumption. There are already .ai groups and other groups that discuss ai issues. The idea of ai agents is a very bad idea (IMHO).
David -- on USENET since before email was standardized
### **Request for Discussion: Creation of the ai.* Hierarchy**
We, Bingo3331 and Corrado Roberto, are excited to propose the establishment
of `ai.*` as a new top-level hierarchy on Usenet, dedicated to artificial intelligence (AI) a transformative field that deserves a prominent and dedicated space in our network. Initially, the hierarchy will host Italian-language groups under `ai.ita.*`, but it is designed to be scalable and accommodate international communities in the future (e.g., `ai.eng.*`, `ai.fr.*`). Below, we outline the details and the compelling benefits for
the Usenet community.
---
### **Proposed Initial Groups**
1. **ai.ita.general**
Charter: "General discussions on artificial intelligence. Primary
language: Italian. English posts welcome. Text-only, no binaries."
2. **ai.ita.chatgpt**
Charter: "Discussions on ChatGPT: news, uses, and developments. Primary language: Italian. English posts welcome. Text-only."
3. **ai.ita.deepseek**
Charter: "Discussions on DeepSeek: news and applications. Primary
language: Italian. English posts permitted. Text-only."
4. **ai.ita.grok**
Charter: "Discussions on Grok: updates and usage. Primary language: Italian.
English posts welcome. Text-only."
5. **ai.ita.image-gen**
Charter: "Discussions on AI image generators (e.g., Midjourney, DALL-E). Primary language: Italian. English posts welcome. Text-only, no binaries."
6. **ai.ita.video-gen**
Charter: "Discussions on AI video and film generators (e.g., Sora).
Primary language: Italian. English posts welcome. Text-only, no binaries."
7. **ai.ita.stats**
Charter: "Statistics and analysis of ai.ita.* group usage: users, posts, trends. Primary language: Italian. English posts welcome. Text-only."
---
### **Why ai.* as a Top-Level Hierarchy?**
#### **1. AI is a Globally Significant Topic**
Artificial intelligence is reshaping technology and society from chatbots
like ChatGPT and Grok to multimedia generators. Usenet, with its rich
history of technical discourse (e.g., `comp.*`, `sci.*`), is the perfect platform for a dedicated AI hierarchy. While `comp.ai.*` exists, it is outdated and underutilized, failing to capture the breadth and dynamism of modern AI. `ai.*` fills this gap with a forward-looking approach.
#### **2. Scalable and Inclusive Design**
Unlike a sub-hierarchy such as `alt.ai.*`, a top-level `ai.*` provides a
robust foundation for growth. We begin with `ai.ita.*` to serve the vibrant Italian Usenet community already active in `it.*` but the structure
supports future expansion to other languages (e.g., `ai.eng.*`, `ai.de.*`)
or sub-topics (e.g., `ai.ethics.*`, `ai.tools.*`). This scalability ensures `ai.*` can evolve with the field.
#### **3. Revitalizing Usenet**
Usenet has seen declining participation. A modern, high-profile hierarchy
like `ai.*`, focused on a trending topic, can attract both seasoned users
and newcomers fascinated by AI. The bilingual approach of `ai.ita.*`
(Italian primary, English welcome) bridges local and global communities, boosting engagement across borders.
#### **4. Alignment with Existing Hierarchies**
`ai.*` fits naturally alongside top-level hierarchies like `comp.*`
(computers), `sci.*` (science), and `rec.*` (recreation) as a distinct thematic domain. It's not a miscellaneous experiment suited for `alt.*`,
but a deliberate, structured proposal with clear purpose and growth potential.
#### **5. Operational Simplicity**
The proposed groups are text-only, aligning with the capabilities of most
Usenet servers. The inclusion of `ai.ita.stats` offers a practical tool to monitor activity and optimize the hierarchy, preventing the proliferation
of empty or redundant groups a common issue elsewhere.
---
### **Request to Admins**
We, Bingo3331 and Corrado Roberto, respectfully ask news server
administrators to:
1. **Propagate the ai.* Hierarchy**: Add `ai.*` to your `active` and
`newsgroups` files, starting with the `ai.ita.*` groups listed above. This will ensure AI discussions reach a global audience.
2. **Forward Control Messages**: Support the PGP-signed `newgroup` and
`checkgroups` messages we will issue to create and maintain these groups. Corrado Roberto's PGP key (active since 1998) is available for
verification.
3. **Establish Peering**: Collaborate with us to set up peering agreements,
particularly with Italian servers (e.g., `it.*`) and major international
ones (e.g., Eternal September), for seamless propagation. Contact Corrado Roberto at <roberto@corradoroberto.it> for technical coordination.
---
### **Motivation and Appeal**
AI is not a passing trend it's the future of technology. Usenet can remain
relevant by embracing `ai.*`, a hierarchy that reflects today's innovations while honoring our tradition of open discussion. Let's not confine AI to
the catch-all chaos of `alt.*`. Instead, let's give it the prominence it deserves with a top-level hierarchy that can thrive and expand.
We invite the community and admins to discuss this proposal. We're open to
feedback to refine the names, charters, or approach. With sufficient
support, we'll proceed with a Call for Votes (CFV) to formalize `ai.*`.
Thank you for your time and consideration!
Bingo3331
Roberto Corrado
news admin of news.corradoroberto.it
### **Request for Discussion: Creation of the ai.* Hierarchy**
We, Bingo3331 and Corrado Roberto, are excited to propose the establishment of `ai.*` as a new top-level hierarchy on Usenet, dedicated to artificial intelligence (AI)rCoa transformative field that deserves a prominent and dedicated space in our network. Initially, the hierarchy will host Italian-language groups under `ai.ita.*`, but it is designed to be scalable and accommodate international communities in the future (e.g., `ai.eng.*`, `ai.fr.*`). Below, we outline the details and the compelling benefits for
the Usenet community.
Initially, the hierarchy will host
Italian-language groups under `ai.ita.*`, but it is designed to be
scalable and accommodate international communities in the future
(e.g., `ai.eng.*`, `ai.fr.*`). Below, we outline the details and the compelling benefits for the Usenet community.
"usenet has seen declining participation" seems to be a prevailing theme
many, if not most, newsgroups that might've been active decades ago have
gone silent . . . artificial anything is better than superficial nothing
`ai.*` as a new top-level hierarchy on Usenet, dedicated to
artificial intelligence (AI) it is designed to be scalable and
accommodate international communities in the future (e.g.,
`ai.eng.*`, `ai.fr.*`)
Usenet has seen declining participation. A modern, high-profile hierarchy like `ai.*`, focused on a trending topic, can attract both seasoned users
and newcomers fascinated by AI. The bilingual approach of `ai.ita.*`
(Italian primary, English welcome) bridges local and global communities, boosting engagement across borders.
On 31/03/25 04:15, D wrote:
"usenet has seen declining participation" seems to be a prevailing theme >>many, if not most, newsgroups that might've been active decades ago have >>gone silent . . . artificial anything is better than superficial nothing
Thanks for the support!!! That is also why we will try to promote the new
"AI*" hierarchy, and the new newsgroups outside of usenet on Reddit, and on the other social and thematic blogs and groups on artificial
intelligence!!!
ThererCOs more than a dozen comp.ai groups, completely unused as far as I
can tell. It doesnrCOt sound like anyonerCOs particularly interested in >talking about AI on Usenet.
If you want Italian-language groups then surely something below it.*
would be more appropriate.
Are there reasons for not using comp.ai for English and maybe creating
a group in it.* for Italian?
I think creating a lot of groups isn't a good way to handle that.
"a.i." is certainly an intriguing theme with profound implications extending >far beyond computers, seems worthy of its own newsgroups, "sci.ai", "soc.ai" >but adding new groups or hierarchies to this quasi-dormant usenet necropolis >sounds more like an exercise in futility ... plain text usenet is old-school >which for those inclined to reading, writing, and arithmetic find preferable >to jetsetter, multimedia, always in a hurry to get somewhere fast lifestyles
1. **comp.ai.* is Stagnant**: While `comp.ai.*` exists forcomp.ai exist for general topics. There isn't much traffic, so nothing
English-language AI topics, most of its groupsrColike
`comp.ai.neural-nets` or `comp.ai.philosophy`rCoare virtually inactive.
From what werCOve seen, they havenrCOt kept up with modern AI
developments (e.g., ChatGPT, generative models). WerCOre not convinced
that adding English posts there would revive them; it might just get
lost in the noise. `ai.*` offers a fresh, focused space to capture
todayrCOs AI enthusiasm, starting with `ai.ita.*` and potentially
expanding (e.g., `ai.eng.*`).
2. **it.* Limits Scalability**: Creating an Italian AI group likeI do not see any reason non-Italians who speak Italian should not use a
`it.ai` or `it.comp.ai` is a solid idea, and `it.*` is indeed active
thanks to the Italian community. But nesting AI under `it.*` ties it
to a national hierarchy, which works great for local topics but less
so for a global field like AI. `ai.*` lets us start with `ai.ita.*`
for Italians while leaving room for other languages (e.g., `ai.fr.*`, `ai.de.*`) without needing separate proposals for each. ItrCOs a more unified, future-proof approach.
That said, werCOre not ruling out synergy with `comp.ai.*` or `it.*`.Revive the already existing groups.
We could crosspost between `ai.ita.general` and `it.comp` to
kickstart activity, or even revive `comp.ai.*` as a parallel effort.
What do you think about that as a bridge?
WerCOd love your take on thisrCowould fewer groups (say, three or four)Usenet is already full of unused groups, which makes finding
feel more sustainable to you? WerCOre flexible on the number if it
helps win your support.
### **Why ai.* is Worth a Shot**It is your choice anyway. You can create the control files you want and
Marco, we share your desire to see Usenet thrive. AI is buzzing
everywhererCoX, Reddit, conferencesrCoand Usenet risks missing out
without a modern, dedicated space.
Could we convince you to back this as an experiment?
Propagate `ai.ita.*`, watch the stats, and see if it takes off. If itI can't support nor not-support that - I can just give my opinion. I
does, Usenet wins; if not, we pivot. Your support could make the differencerCoany tweaks yourCOd suggest to feel good about it?
Thank you for your feedback on our proposal for the `ai.*` hierarchy.
Corrado Roberto and I would like to explain why we believe `ai.*` is not
only viable but also a valuable addition to Usenet-and why we hope to earn your support.
You're absolutely right that there are over a dozen groups under
`comp.ai.*`, and many appear dormant. We've observed this too-groups like `comp.ai.neural-nets` or `comp.ai.philosophy` have little to no activity.
But we see this as an opportunity, not a dead end. The inactivity doesn't necessarily reflect a lack of interest in AI itself, but rather that these groups, created decades ago, no longer align with today's AI landscape. Modern AI-think ChatGPT, Grok, or image/video generators-has evolved far beyond the scope of those older groups, which focus on niche or outdated topics.
You suggest placing these groups under `it.*`, and it's a fair idea-after all, `it.*` is thriving and Italian-focused. However, we see two key
reasons to opt for `ai.*` as a top-level hierarchy:
1. **Thematic Clarity**: `it.*` is a national hierarchy covering everything from `it.comp` to `it.hobby`. Nesting AI groups there (e.g.,
`it.ai.chatgpt`) risks diluting their focus and visibility. AI is a global, cutting-edge field deserving its own identity, not a subcategory of a catch-all hierarchy. `ai.*` signals to users-Italian or not-that this is *the* place for AI discussions, much like `comp.*` does for computing.
2. **Scalability**: Starting with `ai.ita.*` is just the beginning. A top-level `ai.*` allows future growth-`ai.eng.*` for English speakers, `ai.fr.*` for French, etc.-without being tied to a single language or
region. If we limit ourselves to `it.*`, we'd need separate proposals for each language community, fragmenting the effort. `ai.*` offers a unified, forward-thinking structure.
WerCOd love your input on how to make this naming inclusive from the startrCoperhaps a parallel `ia.*` alias for French-speaking peers? OurThanks for your detailed answer and having shared your thoughts about
goal isnrCOt to impose "ai" globally but to create a hub that can
evolve with contributions from communities like yours.
Posting in `it.*` or `comp.*` is a great start, but
a new hierarchy offers visibility and structure that scattered efforts canrCOt match. ItrCOs a chance to attract new usersrCodrawn by AIrCOs buzzrCowho
might then explore `fr.*`, `de.*`, or `uk.*`.
Julien, your expertise with `fr.comp.ia` makes you a perfect ally.
What if we collaborated? Could we tweak the proposalrComaybe adjust naming or scoperCoto win your backing?
Usenet lacks visibility in results from search engines, so I wonderWeb archives like narkive or rslight exist.
why it wouldn't also be the case for a new ai.* hierarchy. People
would have to find it, and be provided with an easy modern way to
read and post messages.
On 01/04/25 18:19, D wrote:
"a.i." is certainly an intriguing theme with profound implications extending >>far beyond computers, seems worthy of its own newsgroups, "sci.ai", "soc.ai" >>but adding new groups or hierarchies to this quasi-dormant usenet necropolis >>sounds more like an exercise in futility ... plain text usenet is old-school >>which for those inclined to reading, writing, and arithmetic find preferable >>to jetsetter, multimedia, always in a hurry to get somewhere fast lifestyles
We're not asking for blind faith. Support `ai.*`, propagate the initial
`ai.ita.*` groups, and let's see the results. Corrado Roberto (with his server at gatto.corradoroberto.it) is ready to handle technical setup and peering, ensuring minimal burden on other admins. If the groups stay empty, we'll reassess but if they take off, Usenet gains a vibrant new hub. It's a low-risk, high-reward chance to breathe life into the network.
What do you think? Could we tweak anything names, charters, or approach--to
address your concerns? We'd love your input to make this a win for
everyone.
Looking forward to your thoughts!
Hi Bingo3331,
May I ask whether you use AI to help to >write your messages?
I definitely do not recommend parallel hierarchies like ia.* for >French-speaking people nor ki.* for German-speaking people, etc.
Usenet lacks visibility in results from search engines, so I wonder why
it wouldn't also be the case for a new ai.* hierarchy. People would
have to find it, and be provided with an easy modern way to read and
post messages.
Thanks for the kind proposal. I am afraid I do not have enough spare
time to properly handle the subject, and >also other priorities.
. . .
Our plan is to stick with `ai.*` as a single, flexible hierarchy. We'll
start with `ai.ita.*` for Italian speakers, keeping "ai" as a recognizable tech shorthand, and any future groups (e.g., for French or German) can fit under `ai.fr.*` or `ai.de.*` with tailored charters. Does that feel like a simpler, more unified way forward to you?
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 65 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 10:55:29 |
| Calls: | 862 |
| Files: | 1,311 |
| D/L today: |
3 files (7,546K bytes) |
| Messages: | 265,264 |