Google Groups up again

Dear Peter,

Google seems to have things re-indexed again, Monday evening.

Earlier, the index and tree would goof around when refreshed, with a
thread claiming one post but showing many and vice-versa.

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech

Since Google archive all of RBT back to the crack of doom (somewhere in
the early '90's), it can take a while to sort out a problem.

For what we pay them (it's free), we get a very nice bargain.

But there are still a few problems--I have to supply a subject for this
thread, even though I'm replying to your original post.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

On 25 Sep 2006 18:59:58 -0700, wrote:

Dear Peter,

Google seems to have things re-indexed again, Monday evening.

Earlier, the index and tree would goof around when refreshed, with a
thread claiming one post but showing many and vice-versa.

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech

Since Google archive all of RBT back to the crack of doom (somewhere in
the early '90's), it can take a while to sort out a problem.

For what we pay them (it's free), we get a very nice bargain.

But there are still a few problems--I have to supply a subject for this
thread, even though I'm replying to your original post.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Aha! It shows up in a few seconds, though divorced from the original
thread "Can't reply--isng Google--too busy."

(Probably a typo for "using Google".)

CF

In article
. com,
wrote:

Path: newssvr21.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm04.news.prodigy. com!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!newscon 04.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.net!newshub.sdsu.edu!p ostnews.google.com!m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From:
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Google Groups up again
Date: 25 Sep 2006 18:59:58 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 21
Message-ID: . com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.9.251.8
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1159236004 8114 127.0.0.1 (26 Sep 2006 02:00:04 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 02:00:04 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To:
Injection-Info: m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com; posting-host=24.9.251.8;
posting-account=CtQ2vQwAAABG1f_wsPl3bDjJq6OASA0L
Xref: prodigy.net rec.bicycles.tech:686812

Dear Peter,

Google seems to have things re-indexed again, Monday evening.

Earlier, the index and tree would goof around when refreshed, with a
thread claiming one post but showing many and vice-versa.

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech

Since Google archive all of RBT back to the crack of doom (somewhere in
the early '90's), it can take a while to sort out a problem.

For what we pay them (it's free), we get a very nice bargain.

But there are still a few problems--I have to supply a subject for this
thread, even though I'm replying to your original post.

They still are not writing References: headers.

--
Michael Press

wrote:
Dear Peter,

Google seems to have things re-indexed again, Monday evening.

Earlier, the index and tree would goof around when refreshed, with a
thread claiming one post but showing many and vice-versa.

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech

Since Google archive all of RBT back to the crack of doom (somewhere in
the early '90's), it can take a while to sort out a problem.

For what we pay them (it's free), we get a very nice bargain.

But there are still a few problems--I have to supply a subject for this
thread, even though I'm replying to your original post.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel


Warning: This may be too retro even for r.b.t.

Anybody ever consider connecting to a usenet server or are most people
posting from behind a firewall at work that blocks port 119?

Marcus

Marcus Coles wrote:

Warning: This may be too retro even for r.b.t.

Anybody ever consider connecting to a usenet server or are most people
posting from behind a firewall at work that blocks port 119?

That's what ssh is for.

--
Dane Buson -
The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings;
the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of misery.
-- Churchill

Marcus Coles wrote:
Warning: This may be too retro even for r.b.t.

Anybody ever consider connecting to a usenet server or are most people
posting from behind a firewall at work that blocks port 119?

Google Groups has its value. It's quick-n-dirty, and
once you get used to its quirks it's almost usable.

But, as you may notice, I've just reactivated rbt on
my home Usenet server (which proxies through Easynews
in a way that even the retro would be scared to
contemplate).

I've had discussions with Google's Usenet maintainers
before. I think it's one of their do-it-yourself-
on-company-time projects, not an official thing. Googlers
get 20% of their work time to do side projects. The idea
is, that's how new ideas get tried, and maybe a
side project will be picked up as a revenue project.
But clearly the people who've tasked themselves with caring
about Google Groups, or at least the Usenet portion of it,
have long since decided it isn't worth their attention,
even when it breaks.

--Blair

Dane Buson wrote:
Marcus Coles wrote:

Warning: This may be too retro even for r.b.t.

Anybody ever consider connecting to a usenet server or are most people
posting from behind a firewall at work that blocks port 119?


That's what ssh is for.


What if you have an http proxy only?

Greg

--
"All my time I spent in heaven
Revelries of dance and wine
Waking to the sound of laughter
Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons

G.T. wrote:
Dane Buson wrote:
Marcus Coles wrote:

Warning: This may be too retro even for r.b.t.

Anybody ever consider connecting to a usenet server or are most people
posting from behind a firewall at work that blocks port 119?

That's what ssh is for.

What if you have an http proxy only?

http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~s.../download.html

Fill in the hostname and port you want to go to.

Connection-Proxy-Proxy Basics

Type: HTTP

Fill in your proxy host/port (login/pw if needed) and away you go.

In the event your proxy will only let you go to port 80 or 443, you may
have to do port forwarding or some such on the destination end.

--
Dane Buson -
"2) Users don't know what they really want, but they know for
certain what they don't want."
- Manubay's Laws for Programmers

Dane Buson wrote:
G.T. wrote:

Dane Buson wrote:

Marcus Coles wrote:


Warning: This may be too retro even for r.b.t.

Anybody ever consider connecting to a usenet server or are most people
posting from behind a firewall at work that blocks port 119?

That's what ssh is for.

What if you have an http proxy only?


http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~s.../download.html

Fill in the hostname and port you want to go to.

Connection-Proxy-Proxy Basics

Type: HTTP

Fill in your proxy host/port (login/pw if needed) and away you go.

In the event your proxy will only let you go to port 80 or 443, you may
have to do port forwarding or some such on the destination end.


Oh, I have it all worked out, thankfully we do have a telnet proxy so I
just need to run ssh on port 23. The point is this stuff is not
trivial, and you need your own box out on the Internet or a good shell
account somewhere.

I got sick of Deja/Google so I was going to get Usenet access at work
one way or another even if it meant getting a DSL line in my office.

Greg

--
"All my time I spent in heaven
Revelries of dance and wine
Waking to the sound of laughter
Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons

G.T. wrote:
Dane Buson wrote:
G.T. wrote:

What if you have an http proxy only?

http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~s.../download.html

snip

In the event your proxy will only let you go to port 80 or 443, you may
have to do port forwarding or some such on the destination end.

Oh, I have it all worked out, thankfully we do have a telnet proxy so I
just need to run ssh on port 23. The point is this stuff is not
trivial, and you need your own box out on the Internet or a good shell
account somewhere.

Well, I assumed we had descended into a propeller-head discussion zone.

I got sick of Deja/Google so I was going to get Usenet access at work
one way or another even if it meant getting a DSL line in my office.

*Nod* They could be worse I suppose, but they don't really match up to
a newsreader specific program. Goodness knows I've grown rather
attached to my newsreader of choice (tin). Especially since I've kicked
the source into shape to remove some personal annoyances.

The main one being the change of rot13 toggling from 'd' to '%'. Grrrrr.

--
Dane Buson -
"There is this special biologist word we use for 'stable'.
It is 'dead'." - Jack Cohen