Spectre wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
FirstClass BBS used to be a pain in the patooty though. If you let it
run indefinately it'd eat the HFS file system somehow. I'd have to pull
it down at least monthly and hit it with diskfix or was it first aid? I forget, in order to keep it flying reliably.
boraxman wrote to Spectre <=-
I use a web based accounting program, and I'm not sure how people
prefer this over a local application. The interface is slow because of latency, the GUI limited and clunky. I'd rather stick with an older, native program than a newer web based one.
Spectre wrote to boraxman <=-
and even Ubuntu. The worst failure is when an install attempt is made
for whatever piece of software fails, and then you're locked at a point where you cannot remove the failed install and you can't complete it either.
Arelor wrote to 2twisty <=-
You pay indirectly when you buy a new OEM computer :-) Besides, there
is people actually purchasing Windows licenses. I suppose it is the new masochist trend...
New masochist trend? If you're building your own desktop PC, it helps
to bu copy of Windows so that you have a legit copy.
That certainly counts as masochism in my book.
"Gates, I have been a bad boy. Spank me, Master, and take 30 bucks from me so I can have Windows updates forced on me at the worst possible moment!"
I checked with my telco broker who walked me through an ingenious set up.
Ingenious indeed. To do that here would've been even more
expensive. Our billing system for call forwarding involved having
to pay for the incoming call and paying for the forwarded call so
they'd sting you twice :/
You guys living in Melbourne had it easy, being able to call from one
side of the city to the other for the cost of a local call.
I use a web based accounting program, and I'm not sure how people prefer this over a local application. The interface is slow because latency, the GUI limited and clunky. I'd rather stick with an older, native program than a newer web based one.
Is "anything but quickbooks" an appropriate accounting system strategy?
... Think of the radio
Its not like the IBM RS/6000 that ran DNS after being plastered into a wall for the next 10 years or so :) Now that...
Re: Re: SSH on BBSes
By: Arelor to Nightfox on Sat Apr 23 2022 04:32 am
New masochist trend? If you're building your own desktop PC, it helps
to bu copy of Windows so that you have a legit copy.
That certainly counts as masochism in my book.
"Gates, I have been a bad boy. Spank me, Master, and take 30 bucks from so I can have Windows updates forced on me at the worst possible moment
Seems like a strange way to look at it. If you want (or need) any new piece software, typically you buy it if it's sold commercially. You pay for compu parts too. Similarly, Windows isn't free software..
Nightfox
Oh yes. "That machine's in a closet somewhere..." was kind of a fascinating thing to play around with for a long time.
Nightfox wrote to Arelor <=-
If the number of people buying (or building) PCs has dwindled that
much, then I can see how it might not be a reliable business model anymore.
boraxman wrote to Arelor <=-
I still have, more or less, the filesystem I had on my first hard disk back in 1994. My "dosbox" directory is the filesystem I had on a 386, which was copied from machine to machine. Still has savegames and high scores from 1994.
Actually, when I replace storage devices I just dump the old Operating System on the new storage and it certainly does not feel like a software upgrade.
The joys of performing backups that copy _EVERYTHING_. If something crashes you can just dump the whole backup in a new drive and you are ready to go.
This one was rather specific, it was literally inside a university
wall... and running DNS so extraordinary long period with no down time.
I think purchasing certain programs is an exercise in masochism. Windows just happens to be one of them, specially since, as pointdexer has pointed out, it is so easy to get from, an OEM licensor.
I miss the corner PC shops, where they'd advertise in the local tech newspaper. They'd custom build a PC to your specs, and throw in the OEM license at their cost.
In San Francisco in the '90s, there had to be dozens of them, and competition was pretty fierce, which kept the prices down the service high.
I think purchasing certain programs is an exercise in masochism. Windows just happens to be one of them, specially since, as pointdexer has pointed out, it is so easy to get from, an OEM licensor.
Re: Re: SSH on BBSes
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Nightfox on Sat Apr 23 2022 07:33 am
I miss the corner PC shops, where they'd advertise in the local tech newspaper. They'd custom build a PC to your specs, and throw in the OEM license at their cost.
In San Francisco in the '90s, there had to be dozens of them, and competition was pretty fierce, which kept the prices down the service high.
I didn't know shops would include a copy of Windows at their own cost. Usua I'd like to build my PC myself though. I'm capable of building a PC, so I figured I can save some money by just buying the parts and assembling it myself, rather than paying for labor for someone else to assemble it.
Nightfox
Was this at CMU?
Usually I'd like to build my PC myself though. I'm capable of building
a PC, so I figured I can save some money by just buying the parts and assembling it myself, rather than paying for labor for someone else to assemble it.
https://www.newegg.com/microsoft-windows-11-pro/p/N82E16832350882
You can also buy it as just a keycode that they email to you:
https://www.newegg.com/microsoft-windows-11-pro-64-bit/p/N82E16832351191
Nightfox
I think purchasing certain programs is an exercise in masochism. Wind just happens to be one of them, specially since, as pointdexer has po out, it is so easy to get from, an OEM licensor.
I may have missed that post, but I'm not really sure what that means. I often like building my own desktop PC, and by doing that, I'm not just going to get Windows, since I didn't buy an off-the-shelf PC. I don't know why it would seem like masochism to buy a copy of Windows when building a PC.. And you can buy OEM copies of Windows - I bought mine this way:
https://www.newegg.com/microsoft-windows-11-pro/p/N82E16832350882
You can also buy it as just a keycode that they email to you:
https://www.newegg.com/microsoft-windows-11-pro-64-bit/p/N82E16832351191
Nightfox
Was this at CMU?
Shrug, I've gotten tired of looking this story up again... I first came across it some 30 years ago.. I have checked it any number of times since...
The important details were plastered into wall, something like 10years up time, and it was an IBM system at a University... after that I'm a tad over it now. Google is out there...
Nightfox wrote to Arelor <=-
I think purchasing certain programs is an exercise in masochism. Windows just happens to be one of them, specially since, as pointdexer has pointed out, it is so easy to get from, an OEM licensor.
I think I saw the message from Poindexter that you're talking
about. It sounds like he was referring to shops that would build
a PC for you according to your specs and include a Windows
license at their cost. However, typically I like to build my PC
myself.. Usually people charge labor costs to assemble a
computer for you. I'm capable of assembling a PC myself, so I
usually prefer to just buy the parts and assemble it myself. The
money I save in labor could be counted toward Windows, I suppose.
At any rate, I still don't know why buying a copy of Windows
would seem weird.. It's just another thing to factor in when
you're buying your computer components.
vorlon wrote to Spectre <=-
Up here in the country, calling from one side of an area to the next
was at community STD (Long distance) rates...
tenser wrote to Spectre <=-
Oh yes. "That machine's in a closet somewhere..." was kind of
a fascinating thing to play around with for a long time.
Nightfox wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
I didn't know shops would include a copy of Windows at their own cost. Usually I'd like to build my PC myself though.
I'm capable of building
a PC, so I figured I can save some money by just buying the parts and assembling it myself, rather than paying for labor for someone else to assemble it.
Nightfox wrote to Arelor <=-
At any rate, I still don't know why buying a copy of Windows would seem weird.. It's just another thing to factor in when you're buying your computer components.
McDoob wrote to Nightfox <=-
That is almost always the case, and the reason I do my own builds too. Even lately, when a GPU could cost twice as much as the entire rest of
the computer, it's still more cost-effective to do it yourself.
Mike Dippel wrote to Nightfox <=-
I do the same via e-Bay. Plenty of sellers for keycodes that are new
and the price is always very reasonable.
Nowadays an OEM machine is just so, so much cheaper unless you scavenge for used parts. Money is certainly no longer the reason why one does a build. I think the main advantage these days is that you get to decide how the computer is built so you can tailor it to specific tasks.
Maybe there is a bit of an exception to high end gaming stations since the OEM may overprice those a little, but if you are a hardcore gamer you are probably going to be also a hardcore PC modder.
Usually I'd like to build my PC myself though. I'm capable of
building a PC, so I figured I can save some money by just buying the
parts and assembling it myself, rather than paying for labor for
someone else to assemble it.
That is almost always the case, and the reason I do my own builds too. Even lately, when a GPU could cost twice as much as the entire rest of the computer, it's still more cost-effective to do it yourself.
https://www.newegg.com/microsoft-windows-11-pro/p/N82E16832350882
I do the same via e-Bay. Plenty of sellers for keycodes that are new and the price is always very reasonable.
I was looking for a laptop, refurbished. Very difficult to get one without Windows. It is masochism paying for someone you're just going to delete.
That is another thing Linux can do that Windows cant, not force you to pay the MS tax.
I have always built my own PCs also, for both the cost savings and the enjoyment of the task. I think that sometimes these days you can
actually get one cheaper that is already assembled, although perhaps not with the exact parts you desire. I'll continue doing my own.
Well.... assuming you would want to install such software on your shiny new computer. :-) I would never do such a thing, myself.
I'm capable of building
a PC, so I figured I can save some money by just buying the parts
and assembling it myself, rather than paying for labor for someone
else to assemble it.
I could, too, but AT cases were a pain in the ass. Having the right motherboard stand-offs and getting the cables routed while still leaving space for airflow was a pain. Looking back, I don't think I calculated how much they charged for the service...
At any rate, I still don't know why buying a copy of Windows would
seem weird.. It's just another thing to factor in when you're buying
your computer components.
It would only seem weird if you're buying a computer to run *nix and are forced, along with anyone else buying computer hardware to buy Windows in order for the OEM to continue selling Windows products.
Between forced purchase agreements, strong-arming vendors, forced incompatibility with Microsoft and alternative OSes, and Office bundling agreements, Microsoft made the most of a monopoly position in the software space.
As an added benefit, the Logitech MX series can connect to multiple dongles, so I put the extra dongle in my work laptop. By connecting a work laptop to HDMI 2 on my monitor, I can switch the keyboard, mouse
and video between two systems without needing a KVM.
There are also a couple of
photo & video editing programs I use sometimes that are available for Windows but not for Linux.
I have this same problem with my SDRs (software defined radios). SDR# is the defacto best program for this purpose, and it only has a Windows version. Sure, I could try the wine approach, or perhaps a VM, but it's so much simpler to just have Windows on my machine. And, as the saying goes, simpler is better.
Nightfox wrote to Gamgee <=-
Well.... assuming you would want to install such software on your shiny new computer. :-) I would never do such a thing, myself.
Do you mainly use Linux?
I've also used Linux for many years,
and currently have my main desktop PC set up to dual-boot Windows
and Linux. I've thought of switching to Linux, but I think the
the main thing keepming me using Windows is that I enjoy PC games sometimes, and not everything I use is available for Linux.
There are also a couple of photo & video editing programs I use
sometimes that are available for Windows but not for Linux.
There are also a couple of photo & video editing programs I use
sometimes that are available for Windows but not for Linux.
Understood, but there may be alternative applications that would do the job, after climbing a learning curve. Might not be worth the effort. Nothing wrong with dual-booting!
I didn't know shops would include a copy of Windows at their own cost.
They'd sell Windows as part of the cost, or sort of look at you and drop in a shrink-wrapped copy of DOS and shrug.
Yeah, often I just stay in Windows because it's the OS where all of the software I use will run. It's easier than rebooting back and forth
Yeah, often I just stay in Windows because it's the OS where all of the software I use will run. It's easier than rebooting back and forth between Windows and Linux, and can be smoother than using Wine or a VM.
Nightfox
My experience is that it is rare that a person is actually stuck with a particular Operating Sytem for home use. If I was left stuck with something other than Linux or OpenBSD I could most likely find alternatives to the software I use.
Gaming in particular is funny because maybe the game I would play in a given moment is not available on platform X, but typicaly there will be other good games available on platform Y. Cointidentially, I totally despise new generation videogames but the old games I want to play could be run on a toaster. I guess I am lucky.
I didn't know shops would include a copy of Windows at their own cost.
They'd sell Windows as part of the cost, or sort of look at you and dro in a shrink-wrapped copy of DOS and shrug.
I'm not sure now off hand how it worked, but there was a time M$ got a license fee for every PC going. After this ran for some time, and people were starting to use Linux as an alternative, there was a bit of a to do, an a court case I think that stopped that and if you didn't want Windows you'd get a "refund" on that license.
Spec
*** THE READER V4.50 [freeware]
Up here in the country, calling from one side of an area to
the next was at community STD (Long distance) rates...
For residential service, there was a local zone that was free to
call; they were based on an arbitrary range from your phone.
Outside of that, but inside of the area allowed to long distance
traffic was "local toll" calls. Sometimes, they ended up being more
I'm not sure now off hand how it worked, but there was a time M$ got a license fee for every PC going. After this ran for some time, and people were starting to use Linux as an alternative, there was a bit of a to do, and a court case I think that stopped that and if you didn't want Windows you'd get a "refund" on that license.
Nightfox wrote to Arelor <=-
I could probably find Linux alternatives for some of the Windows
software I use, but in some cases I'm not sure. In the past
couple years, there are a couple of pieces of software I've been
using for Windows that use AI to upscale photos and videos (Topaz
Labs Gigapixel and Video Enhance AI), and they don't make
versions of those for Linux. I'm not sure if similar AI-based
software exists for Linux, but I'd be interested in checking.
Sometimes it seems like there just isn't a great alternative for
something in Linux. One photo viewer I like to use in Windows is IrfanView - It's free and it has a lot of plugins available. I
also just like the way it works as far as little things like
photo zooming, cropping, etc.. I've looked over the years and
just haven't seen anything that I feel compares to IrfanView on
Linux.
As far as games, there are some alternative options for some
games in Linux, but often times, I'd rather play a specific game
rather than an alternative. One example is Microsoft Flight
Simulator 2020. There are alternatives for Linux - namely,
X-Plane 11 is available for Linux and seems to run quite well,
but it's just not the same. One of the reasons Microsoft Flight
Simulator 2020 has appeal is that as you fly in different places,
it downloads real-world map detail and weather information from
the internet and renders the world in real-time; also, the
graphics are really great. X-Plane 11 does not do the real-time
scenery or weather rendering; also its graphics are pretty good
but maybe not to the level of Microsoft's.
I didn't know shops would include a copy of Windows at their own cost Usually I'd like to build my PC myself though.
They'd sell Windows as part of the cost, or sort of look at you and drop in a shrink-wrapped copy of DOS and shrug.
I'm capable of building
a PC, so I figured I can save some money by just buying the parts and assembling it myself, rather than paying for labor for someone else t assemble it.
I could, too, but AT cases were a pain in the ass. Having the right motherboard stand-offs and getting the cables routed while still leaving space for airflow was a pain. Looking back, I don't think I calculated
how much they charged for the service...
Well.... assuming you would want to install such software on your shi new computer. :-) I would never do such a thing, myself.
Do you mainly use Linux?
I pretty much ONLY use Linux. I do have a work laptop that runs Win10 that I have to use because of the nature of the job/software that it uses, and I have an aging desktop that I used to use for gaming (and still do, but only with 10-year old games because it won't run the
newest stuff). My BBS machine, daily driver laptop, and another
desktop (rarely used), all use only Linux. I have a W7 VM on the laptop to test a few things now and then.
Yes, I get that. Gaming on Linux has come a long way (and helped by Steam), but it's not quite there when compared to Windows.
Understood, but there may be alternative applications that would do the job, after climbing a learning curve. Might not be worth the effort. Nothing wrong with dual-booting!
I could probably find Linux alternatives for some of the Windows
software I use, but in some cases I'm not sure. In the past couple
years, there are a couple of pieces of software I've been using for Windows that use AI to upscale photos and videos (Topaz Labs Gigapixel
and Video Enhance AI), and they don't make versions of those for Linux. I'm not sure if similar AI-based software exists for Linux, but I'd be interested in checking.
Sometimes it seems like there just isn't a great alternative for
something in Linux. One photo viewer I like to use in Windows is IrfanView - It's free and it has a lot of plugins available. I also
just like the way it works as far as little things like photo zooming, cropping, etc.. I've looked over the years and just haven't seen
anything that I feel compares to IrfanView on Linux.
As far as games, there are some alternative options for some games in Linux, but often times, I'd rather play a specific game rather than an alternative. One example is Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020. There are alternatives for Linux - namely, X-Plane 11 is available for Linux and seems to run quite well, but it's just not the same. One of the reasons Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 has appeal is that as you fly in
different places, it downloads real-world map detail and weather information from the internet and renders the world in real-time; also, the graphics are really great. X-Plane 11 does not do the real-time scenery or weather rendering; also its graphics are pretty good but
maybe not to the level of Microsoft's.
Nightfox
It was a mess.
Some people started recording themselves on camera actively clicking on the "I don't accept" button at the end of the EULA upon turning on the computer for the first time. Then they would ask for the license fee
back since back in the day the EULA had some clause about compensating
the customer.
Microsoft killed the practice by removing the button, so the only available button was "I Accept." How poetic (and representative of the software industry practices).
The best way to evade the Microsoft tax is to build your computers from spare parts or buy from a dealer which is not selling/reselling Windows licenses. Typically this includes dealers which buy computers in bulk
from bankrupt firms and then sell them at a discount to end users. Now
you may guess why my computers came with stickers with logos of banks
and defunct firms pasted all over them.
I think people does not realize how tight Microsoft's grip was on the market because they don't realize how much extra effort it used to be to purchase general computing equipment without going through Microsoft.
--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken
Microsofts business practices are despicable. It is an abuse of their position, to effectively force people to buy their product. Capitalism
is supposed to be about the consumer choosing who to do business with.
Switching OS is more for the meta-changes, that is, not about the applications, but how the computer works overall. If one is happy with the Windows paradigm, can't see an advantage in a different paradigm, is
Before VPSes, before the cloud, before high-speed home broadband, there was the Sparc 2 sitting above the ceiling tiles, running without complaints on top of an HVAC vent. Good times.
rather than an alternative. One example is Microsoft Flight
Simulator 2020. There are alternatives for Linux - namely,
X-Plane 11 is available for Linux and seems to run quite well,
This may be worth looking at: https://www.flightgear.org/
Microsofts business practices are despicable. It is an abuse of thei position, to effectively force people to buy their product. Capitali is supposed to be about the consumer choosing who to do business with
I don't think there's anything in the Capitalism description about consumer choice. Its more about money is king, grab that cash with both hands and make a stash. At its heart capitalism isn't free market.
ST
Switching OS is more for the meta-changes, that is, not about the applications, but how the computer works overall. If one is happy wi the Windows paradigm, can't see an advantage in a different paradigm,
You're a complete Boron :P Applications are intrinsically tied to their operating system. Being able to run alien applications on emulated software is a relatively recent thing. Plus clowns like Micro$loth would keep changing their data format so nothing would work right for very
long. Changing office data formats, SMB authentication/format.. all
sorts o' stuff.
A lot of business ran with M$ because you've got for better or worse support you can rely on to some degree because you have to buy it, business tends to like that sort of thing. Plus they give you the tools
to lock your onsite desktops down within a poofteenth of each other. A
bit like the theory that CISCO is not especially flash and can be expensive, but "nobody ever got fired for buying Cisco.
Spec
hands and make a stash. At its heart capitalism isn't free market.
I don't think there's anything in the Capitalism description about consumer choice. Its more about money is king, grab that cash with bo hands and make a stash. At its heart capitalism isn't free market.
Well "consumers having choices" is what is printed on the box. I guess we've been sold a lemon.
I'm not sure what point of mine you're disagreeing with. Are people choosing to switch away from Windows to Linux, simply to use different applications?
Well "consumers having choices" is what is printed on the box. I gue we've been sold a lemon.
No, you didn't read the fine print.
https:/www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/042215/what-difference-between-cap st-system-and-free-market-system.asp
Gives a pretty good run down. The US is a pretty good example of a primarily capitalist economy, the rich are getting richer while the poor and downtrodden become homeless. Its more geared to monopolistic tendencies, and requires more interventions to keep it "fair". It does have other aspects that are more free market but they do not appear to
be as dominant.
ST
I'm not sure what point of mine you're disagreeing with. Are people choosing to switch away from Windows to Linux, simply to use differen applications?
Especially prior to todays rampant emulations, yes a specific O/S
would've been chosen for a combination of Applications, and attributes that suit the purchaser.
So its really a horses for courses thing.. I don't know ANY business
that has rolled out any Linux flavour as its desktop model primarily because its too hard and you're not guaranteed of support. At least pre any of the commerically oriented distro days, but to some degree afterwards. That means in the corporate world its largely going to be a back orrifice work horse if it has specific value in some capacity and
the desktops will remain M$ driven.
But by the same token that people/business may swap from one to another for specific software there'll be people moving the opposite way for the same reasons or perceived benefits. Be those benefits a locked down dekstop, specific user interface applications or whatever else they see
in it. Or an application that has no parallel on the other platform. Best example off hand is all the years Apple had a strangle hold on the Desktop Publishing and design business. It was because the PC was incapable of the same job.
Spec
I was looking for a laptop, refurbished. Very difficult to get one without Windows. It is masochism paying for someone you're just going
to delete.
That is another thing Linux can do that Windows cant, not force you to
pay the MS tax.
Spectre wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
I'm not sure now off hand how it worked, but there was a time M$ got a license fee for every PC going. After this ran for some time, and
people were starting to use Linux as an alternative, there was a bit of
a to do, and a court case I think that stopped that and if you didn't
want Windows you'd get a "refund" on that license.
I'm not sure what point of mine you're disagreeing with. Are people choosing to switch away from Windows to Linux, simply to use different applications?
Microsoft claimed they were the victim of piracy, and because of it, as a requirement to sell DOS and later Windows licenses, forced OEMs to buy a copy of either for each PC they built. That gave Microsoft a leg up on alternative DOSes and OS/2, since you'd already paid for DOS/Windows.
I had home users in mind when I was making that statement. Business would have different requirements.
But that was the point I was making, that things like the User Interface, stability, the desktop is what will motivate many. Sure, some people use Mac because of the availabilty of apps, but many will also talk about the actual hardware as being the reason, the subtle differences in the mouse, the way the GUI works, the trackpad, just making graphical work easier, even if the app is the same.
Do you mainly use Linux? I've also used Linux for many years, and currently have my main desktop PC set up to dual-boot Windows and Linux. I've thought of switching to Linux, but I think the the main thing keepming me using Windows is that I enjoy PC games sometimes, and not everything I use is available for Linux. There are also a couple of
photo & video editing programs I use sometimes that are available for Windows but not for Linux.
Yeah, sometimes it was a pain. I think building a PC has gotten easier, perhaps starting with the ATX standard.
"Piracy" was Microsoft's reasoning for requiring OEMs to buy a license
for Windows for every PC they sell? I'd have thought they'd be more concerned about end users at home (building their own PC) pirating Windows. I thought PC OEMs (at least in the US) were generally pretty good about buying legit Windows licenses for their PCs. But I guess
there were many people who would buy a pre-built PC, and they'd have no reason to pirate Windows if the PC already came with a Windows license.
I am so glad to be back in the BBS scene. When I was young so many
nights filled with a case of pepsi and just being a full on nerd. Being back is just more than nostalgic. This is just awesome! thanks for all being apart of BBSing! Love it!
DrClaw
The ZIF socket was the big step to allow people to build a computer
and not worry they were breaking stuff. Working on the old Amiga's putting a new chip in that wasn't the trap door was a bit scary and
you wanted a crunch.
Most games are working on Linux now. What games do you want to play?
I seem to remember reading an article somewhere about how MS was going to have hardware vendors of all sorts pay what would basically be a MS tax and then they were going to just give windows away. So effectively building a PC would still result in paying for a license. I don't don't know what ever happened to that idea.
Recently, one game I've been enjoying is Microsoft Flight Simulator
2020. There's also Quake II RTX (a modern Quake 2 that supports ray tracing with the Nvidia RTX graphics cards).
That would be weird.. Especially if you're building your own PC, why should Microsoft get any revenue for Windows if you don't plan to
install Windows on your PC? I don't think Microsoft would get to decide people should pay them money just for building a PC..
Recently, one game I've been enjoying is Microsoft Flight Simulator
2020.
I know flight simulator runs and this is from Nvidias site ...
Most games are working on Linux now. What games do you want to play?
I won't get into a debate about Capitalism, as its off topic. I'll just say I don't actually believe that it is about consumer choices, that's just an angle that people who support the system overplay.
It is about private ownership of the means of production, and a social structure created to serve Capital.
Not sure where you are located, but if your area has a Free Geek your
set. They are a computer recycler. They get donations from large businesses. Typically when they are upgrading in mass. Then they clean them up up install Ubuntu and sell them cheap. Costs vary from $40 - $200, on most laptops depending on what you need. They are not easy to google for. I find the local one by typing in Free Geek Twin Cities.
That will located the one we have in our state. If just look up Free
Geek you will find the one in OR because thats where their headquarters are. Can't get a cheaper laptop in any other store I know of.
DrClaw
I had home users in mind when I was making that statement. Business have different requirements.
But that was the point I was making, that things like the User Interf stability, the desktop is what will motivate many. Sure, some people Mac because of the availabilty of apps, but many will also talk about actual hardware as being the reason, the subtle differences in the mo the way the GUI works, the trackpad, just making graphical work easie even if the app is the same.
That means you're working on a pretty narrow set of data too. Was a time most users would have at home whatever they used at work... Windaz... there were exceptions, I know someone that worked at IBM for 27years and always used a Mac at home, but he's more the exception. However I still believe its horses for courses for the most part rather than this is pretty and easy to use, but it can't do the job I need it to, because there's no software.
Spec
I am so glad to be back in the BBS scene. When I was young so many
nights filled with a case of pepsi and just being a full on nerd. Being back is just more than nostalgic. This is just awesome! thanks for all being apart of BBSing! Love it!
DrClaw
Sysop Noverdu BBS (Noverdu.com)
claw wrote to boraxman <=-
Not sure where you are located, but if your area has a Free Geek your
set. They are a computer recycler. They get donations from large businesses. Typically when they are upgrading in mass. Then they clean them up up install Ubuntu and sell them cheap.
poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Spectre <=-
There was a way to get a refund, but it was as difficult as Microsoft could make it. It was one of the first "shrinkwrap" license issues to
come to court. By opening the package you agreed to the license terms before, if memory recalls, being able to read the full licensing terms.
Really? I tried doing a quick search but I didn't see anything on Nvidia's site about Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 running in Linux.
I don't use any GUI under linux, just console based tools for networking for the most part. Plus whatever other services www, mysql etc... While said boxen are perfectly capable for what they do, they would struggle
to play any remotely recent game. Said systems are also headless.
far as MS Flight Sim you just run it with proton and it works. There isn't anything special to get that one going.
Same here, but without the Pepsi. It's more than just nostalgia, a lot
of "Social Media" just downright sucks, and I prefer this world to Twitter, Tik Tok, Farcebook, et al. More focused discussion, and
frankly, a better interface for text based discussion. I want a return
to something simpler, more pure, with more focus.
I haven't used Proton, but I suppose I'd have to give it a try. Before running it though, I'd think one hurdle might be getting it installed in Linux in the first place..
can always access them through the web interface. Do you choose not to use the GUI because you don't like it or because of the resource cost?
Perhaps. From people I know, and from people I've spoken to at Linux user grous and free software groups, and anyone else I know who's meddled, it was more the OS itself, rather than available applications which is why they switched. Stability, freedom, low cost. The apps they use didn't come up, with the exception of "LAMP", but you can run a webserver on Windows. It ju works different on Linux.
boraxman wrote to claw <=-
That is pretty cool, I will look out for them. When I was looking, I
was looking at newer models (Thinkpads, T450 or later) which were above $200.
boraxman wrote to Spectre <=-
they use didn't come up, with the exception of "LAMP", but you can run
a webserver on Windows. It just works different on Linux.
boraxman wrote to claw <=-
Same here, but without the Pepsi. It's more than just nostalgia, a lot
of "Social Media" just downright sucks, and I prefer this world to Twitter, Tik Tok, Farcebook, et al. More focused discussion, and
frankly, a better interface for text based discussion. I want a return
to something simpler, more pure, with more focus.
The advertising based business model that social media uses is worse
than toxic, it is a social disaster. BBS's aren't subject to that.
I'm rediscovering IRC and playing with Mastodon and enjoy both more than Facebook; I haven't logged into FB in some time.
Originally because of the resource issue... but then that was a 386 it
was running on.. but no mostly because I preferred the CLI, always have, like my text better than the pointy clicky thing.. I think early on most of the X desktop was pretty ordinary.. I haven't really looked at one since eeebuntu though either... thats got to be about 8 years or more
ago now...
What do you have for a system, and what os do you run now?
far as MS Flight Sim you just run it with proton and it works. There anything special to get that one going.
I haven't used Proton, but I suppose I'd have to give it a try. Before running it though, I'd think one hurdle might be getting it installed in Linux in the first place..
Nightfox
--- SBBSecho 3.15-Win32
Perhaps. From people I know, and from people I've spoken to at Linux u grous and free software groups, and anyone else I know who's meddled, i more the OS itself, rather than available applications which is why the switched. Stability, freedom, low cost. The apps they use didn't come with the exception of "LAMP", but you can run a webserver on Windows. works different on Linux.
In the FOSS world there is a big cultural difference in that end users
are fine reporting bugs and trying to bring features in if they are not available.
This morning, OpenBSD did not support Nitrokeys. An hour ago it got experimental support because a bearded guy who smells like a horse
decided to port its reference libraries over.
I do know people who switched to Linux because of certain applications, though.
--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken
That is pretty cool, I will look out for them. When I was looking, I was looking at newer models (Thinkpads, T450 or later) which were abo $200.
Thinkpads have a pretty long life, and used ones were usually maxxed out (or close to it) so a business could get 3 years out of them.
I have a T410, it's one of the last with a traditional keyboard, and
it's not an Ultrabook, but I love the keyboard and it's got an old i7
CPU in it.
The T430 (I think) was the first thinner Thinkpad with the "island" keyboard, they most likely have a lot of life left, especially if you replace the SATA drive with an SSD. You might get a deal on one.
Some of the older T series had a 2.5" SATA drive and a 16GB MMC drive. Windows has a driver to use the MMC like a big cache that's kind of neat.
they use didn't come up, with the exception of "LAMP", but you can ru a webserver on Windows. It just works different on Linux.
Heck, you can run a whole LAMP stack on Windows. I've seen people do
their dev on a local stack on their desktop then push to staging and production on Linux.
That could be because people feel that the projects are accessible, and that the developers are wanting to hear ideas and will actually read and take seriously feedback and reports. Probably because they are smaller
I haven't used Proton, but I suppose I'd have to give it a try.
Before running it though, I'd think one hurdle might be getting it
installed in Linux in the first place..
Do you have a steam account?
That could be because people feel that the projects are accessible, and that the developers are wanting to hear ideas and will actually read an take seriously feedback and reports. Probably because they are smaller
For some proportion of the early adopters this might have been the case, and welcome change to M$ of the era. For Joe Mugg users these days... I think you're going to be in the minority with that assertion...there's probably still a percentage that think like that, but it'll bet a shadow of its forme self in the number of nubs out there using it now.
ST
That could be because people feel that the projects are accessible, a that the developers are wanting to hear ideas and will actually read take seriously feedback and reports. Probably because they are small
For some proportion of the early adopters this might have been the case, and welcome change to M$ of the era. For Joe Mugg users these days... I think you're going to be in the minority with that assertion...there's probably still a percentage that think like that, but it'll bet a shadow of its former self in the number of nubs out there using it now.
ST
I haven't used Proton, but I suppose I'd have to give it a try.
Before running it though, I'd think one hurdle might be getting it
installed in Linux in the first place..
Do you have a steam account?
Yes, I do.
Nightfox
boraxman wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
I'm still using a T43 that I got second hand. The only thing I need to change on it was to add 1G of RAM, and get a bigger hard drive. Still works just fine.
boraxman wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
Heck, you can run a whole LAMP stack on Windows. I've seen people do
their dev on a local stack on their desktop then push to staging and production on Linux.
You mean WAMP? The L stands for Linux.
I'm still using a T43 that I got second hand. The only thing I need change on it was to add 1G of RAM, and get a bigger hard drive. Stil works just fine.
The T43 has DDR3 memory and slightly faster graphics than the other T series, it's a nice workhorse. Cheap parts.
You can find PATA SSDs that'll work; I had a 64GB SSD in mine, and it
gave me a couple of more years of usefulness out of it.
T43. Best. Laptop. Keyboard. Ever.
You mean WAMP? The L stands for Linux.
I suppose they called it AMP, it's been a while since I took the class.
For quite some time, local libraries partnered with Linda, the people Linkedin bought for their online learning platform. You could watch all
of the linkedin premium content for free with a library card. Once Microsoft bought them, they required a Linkedin ID for Linda, and libraries couldn't offer the platform anymore. Shame.
... Have you ever seen anything like this place?
You can find PATA SSDs that'll work; I had a 64GB SSD in mine, and it gave me a couple of more years of usefulness out of it.
I just installed a 320G PATA hard drive in the machine. I chose that instead of an SSD for space and price. Probably should have got the
SSD, but to be honest, the hard drive is fast enough. I hibernate it,
so boot time is not a problem.
boraxman wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
I just installed a 320G PATA hard drive in the machine. I chose that instead of an SSD for space and price.
You can find PATA SSDs that'll work; I had a 64GB SSD in mine, a gave me a couple of more years of usefulness out of it.
I just installed a 320G PATA hard drive in the machine. I chose that instead of an SSD for space and price. Probably should have got the SSD, but to be honest, the hard drive is fast enough. I hibernate it so boot time is not a problem.
I'm a tad surprised you can still find them.. I assume they're not new. There are plenty of SATA -> PATA adapters out there..
ST
I just installed a 320G PATA hard drive in the machine. I chose that instead of an SSD for space and price.
I didn't know they made PATA drives that big?
What was nice about them was being able to put a drive in the ultrabay;
I had a 64GB SSD and a 160 in the ultrabay.
... When in doubt, predict that the trend will continue.
The Steam desktop application will install proton for you when you install a game through it. You'll be able to use that version of proton to run any other game.
If you have the game for steam it does all the work for you. Install steam on Linux which is probably available on your repository and then just tell it to install Flight simulator.
The Steam desktop application will install proton for you when you in a game through it. You'll be able to use that version of proton to ru other game.
I tried that out today in my Linux installation on my main PC, with Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020. It looked like I had to first enable Proton in Steam's compatibility settings for the game before it would allow me to install it. And there are several versions of Proton to choose from to run the game. I tried only a couple (the development version, and the most recent versioned one), but without much luck.
With the development version of Proton, Microsoft Flight Simulator would start up but then immediately quit back to the Linux desktop. With the most recent versioned release, Microsoft Flight Simulator started, and I heard its sound, but it was only showing a blank white screen.
Proton's compatibility list online says Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 largely works with just some minor issues. I guess I'll have to try
some different Proton versions or settings and see what happens.
Nightfox
Telnet seems to be the default, and it seems most users won't care
enough to switch it over to SSH. People have said they don't think
Ah, but there *is* value. Why not keep your comms secret? It costs you
I agree. I was just saying it seems many other BBS users don't care so much.
I will make it my mission to educate them.
By default Mystic doesn't use SSL when sending messages out via binkp,
So, for those of us who have the ability to use SSH and SSL, I think we should, and we should actively find ways of making the network more secure
I thought I saw somewhere that the message packets can at least be
zipped with a password.
The very definition of echomail is public -- so someone being able to
read packets is no big deal.
However, since the node<>hub connection is in plain text and there are passwords exchanged....it would be nice if it were more secure.
So, for those of us who have the ability to use SSH and SSL, I think we should, and we should actively find ways of making the network more
secure where possible. Granted, as long as any part of the network is unsecure, the whole network is "unsecure," but that's not an excuse to just "toss it all" and don't even try.
So, on MY board, I plan to detect telnet users and encourage them to switch to SSH since Mystic supports it natively.
I'm pretty sure I saw people on the Fido FTSC talking about improving BinkP so that it could use TLS. And the authors of Mystic and Syncronet were part of that discussion (and are currently on the FTSC).
I've logged into a couple of boards that do just that. It looks like they've added a line or two to the PRELOGIN menu that displays some text using ACS !OS encouraging them to switch to SSH.
doesn't take into account Synchronet boards who over these messages bases via http:
http://vert.synchro.net/?page=001-forum.ssjs&sub=fsx_gen
Give it a little bit and this message I'm typing right now over an SSH connection, (I should probably be actually working), will be fully visible there. There are also boards who make these message bases available over NNTP.
Thank you for pointing this out; I've harped on it before and it needsI agree; I have even seen echo content on web sites that indexed NNTP.
to be said on occasion.
This isn't to say that people can't or shouldn't try to set up BBSs so that they're less discoverable, not searchable from the web, etc., but
I'm not a fan of this medium being sold wholesale as some safe haven
I've more been talking about securing and encrypting the CONNECTION, more so than the content. Any BBS sysop that wants to can leak any info they want, so true "privacy" isn't there unless we posted messages encrypted
If set up right, LOCAL groups can be private, provided that the sysop and users respect that privacy.....
These modern boards are no more "private" or "underground" than the BBSes of old; but we can make them more secure and add a modicum of privacy from
I thought I saw somewhere that the message packets can at least be
zipped with a password.
The very definition of echomail is public -- so someone being able to
read packets is no big deal.
However, since the node<>hub connection is in plain text and there are passwords exchanged....it would be nice if it were more secure.
If I ever decided to run a hub, I'd make it an SSL hub like you suggest
so that people who WANT to do secure sessions can.
I know that I'm trying to shoehorn a technology from a simpler era into today's mindset...... But security and privacy are a real thing now,
even if the tools we are using aren't made for that.
I wish I had the skill to write that fossil driver for serial<>ssh. Sadly, since SSH requires authentication, simply doing that would
require a user to have 2 sets of credentials or at best log in twice
since the underlying BBS software wold have no way to get the authentication passed through.
So, for those of us who have the ability to use SSH and SSL, I think we should, and we should actively find ways of making the network more
secure where possible. Granted, as long as any part of the network is unsecure, the whole network is "unsecure," but that's not an excuse to just "toss it all" and don't even try.
So, on MY board, I plan to detect telnet users and encourage them to switch to SSH since Mystic supports it natively.
Thank you for pointing this out; I've harped on it before and it needs
to be said on occasion.
People who think that they're achieving privacy by using a typical BBS
are sorely mistaken. It's a common belief BBSs are "private", "underground", and somehow "not the internet", but few are configured accordingly. At best we've got obscurity.
This isn't to say that people can't or shouldn't try to set up BBSs so that they're less discoverable, not searchable from the web, etc., but
I'm not a fan of this medium being sold wholesale as some safe haven
from prying eyes.
---
echicken
The really jarring thing, as I found with FidoNet, is that I didn't know that posts with my REAL NAME would be on the Internet. I actually felt violated and pissed off, and found this very, very poor form. No, the
I'm going to start here with, I don't put my real name on anything that
is any form of online, BBS, FacePlant or anywhere else. That stems from discussions about privacy all the way back at Yr10/Form 3 computer studies, that kind of thinking seems to have gone completely by the wayside these days though.
Fido has a history of wanting real names for access to its echoes though... then it gets shady as to what can be done with the echoes by
any particular BBS. I started with the theory of feeding FSX into a
local news server and from there to a local and limited forum on the TLP website.. this partially eventuated but not being happy with the achievable result I scrapped it. Now someone else might decide its a great thing to pop it up on an open forum, and then your name is out
there for all to see.. but you had to use it for FIDO in the first
place. I'm not sure there's a hard and fast answer there, unless FIDO rule implemented regarding suitable use of the network/echo data.
Spec
I don't like the fact we have to be this careful, but that is just the way it is. The fact is that employers will search for your name, and social mores change, so something you said today, which is innocent, is later "problematic". This is what worries me, the more and more that is considered to be bigoted and wrong, the more and more likely things we say will in 10 years time come up and besmirch our character.
In that sense, I'd rather use telnet on a BBS, with the discussion not indexed by web crawlers, than SSH on a BBS, with the discussion being indexed and made permanent by web crawlers.
Well this falls back to a number of ideas..
The BBS system, network isn't private.
As soon as you post something you've lost control of that information
Its something that some are going to call a natural progression of the antique technology.
Its something to be aware of and adjust accordingly, because its already to late to change it.
Spec
No, but neither is a discussion between colleagues at a pub. But then, you wouldn't expect one of those colleagues to record it and upload it to YouTube. That is just rude. Just as it is rude to take pictures of people and upload them on facebook.
The pub discussion is a bad analogy, a group of colleagues or friends, you'd expect to have a certain level of discretion, and by nature is a fairly but not 100% closed loop. If one of them then did what you're suggesting then it's probably just as much of an indictment of the
company you're keeping. By its very nature the BBS is far more open, anyone can read it.. and the network makes that doubly true.
The FacePlant analogy is in some ways even worse. If you're out in
public, I believe and I may be wrong, its open season anyone can take
your photo and do what they will with it. How do you think tabloid photographers got away with it all those years? It'd be different if you're in a closed site, be it home or to some degree workplace and that occurred then you'd have something to complain about or seek legal
remedy.
If I'm at a friend party, or a family gathering, no I do not expect people to post my photo online. I am very specific with them about this and I have also indicated to the school that my children go to that photos of them are not to go on Social Media.
Regarding the BBS, that again is not true. One needs to create an account to gain access. This has always been the case, though some have guest access. This is different to a webpage, where the data is freely available.
For this discussion to be visible to all, someone has to specifically make it available. It is by default not.
I am well aware the prevailing assumption is that everything that happens over TCP/IP must be "public", but it is this assumption that I am challenging. It is a culture shift that we need, where we aim for privacy instead of openness. Where we allow, and have, discussions with a smaller, limited audience.
If everyone argues the same way that you do, then all our privacy is gone, and our lives go under the giant panopticon, to be tracked, catalogued for eternity, for every word and discussion we have to be open for scrutinty by all. In other words a dystopia.
I will fight against that. I do NOT accept this dystopia. Period, and if
stayed there. That is something we've lost, why such reticence to bring that back?
posts with my REAL NAME would be on the Internet. I actually felt violated
and pissed off, and found this very, very poor form. No, the argument that is the "Internet" doesn't hold. I rarely take part in FidoNet as a result, and I'm skeptical of posting here.
I see potential, but we need to to be accommodative of new social mores and expectations, and set a high standard.
posts with my REAL NAME would be on the Internet. I actually felt viol
Oh, good Lord. Your REAL NAME on the internet. Not like there isn't 200000 John Smith's out there. Come on.
and pissed off, and found this very, very poor form. No, the argument is the "Internet" doesn't hold. I rarely take part in FidoNet as a res and I'm skeptical of posting here.
Then leave. No one wants a cry baby that wants to stay hidden because they are hiding something or doing something illegal.
Dude, this is a BBS ... you knew what was expected in 1993. NOTHING has changed. Only the stupid mindset of people since then. All the ones
now want to run and hide.
Glad to see my threads are popular. Enjoy and happy writing to you all. :-)
Carry on, carrying on!
Carry on, carrying on!
That sounds like a lot of carry on..
Hey, I haven't heard any 'Air Hostess' complain...twice...
Hey, I haven't heard any 'Air Hostess' complain...twice...
You know the inflatable ones don't count?
You know the inflatable ones don't count?
Tell that to Leslie Neilson, in 'Airplane'! XD
Tell that to Leslie Neilson, in 'Airplane'! XD
Since there are some people here from Australia - I've heard that movie is known as "Flying High" in Australia. (Can anyone confirm?)
Tell that to Leslie Neilson, in 'Airplane'! XD
There is justifiable reason for this. BBS's WERE private in the 90s. You couldn't find out what was on a BBS without dialing in, creating an
Today, the same mentality holds. The fact it is accessed via TCP/IP doesn't change anything.
BBS's were NOT searchable from the web in their heyday, and by default are NOT searchable unless someone takes very, very specific steps in order to rebroadcast that information.
That is my point of contention, or should that be, soreness, that sysops are choosing to make text which remains within the net, more public by their actions. That is the behaviour and action, that I believe doesn't have a place in todays climate.
There is no need for this at all. Some people are happy putting their
Then leave. No one wants a cry baby that wants to stay hidden because they are hiding something or doing something illegal.
I'm the same with #1 son... no social media, although he's getting to be past my sphere of influence. But these are exceptions rather than the rule.
Yeah, nah... only the scope of the audience has changed, and with it the extended manners of distribution.
Well yes it is available to any who care to look for it. The method of "normal" access makes it kind of a clique but it is none the less public information. Otherwise there'd be no public echoes or message areas,
just email. I feel your view is naive.
Essentially it is, the internet is a large public network. Regardless of protocol driving it. You're not going to get the privacy you're looking for in that environment. You're looking for a close system, near
dial-up style bbs.. sorry they died a long time ago... with the advent
of the first echonets. This is one genie thats not going to go back
into that bottle, the world had large appears to have mostly ignored or become complacent about privacy. The best you can achieve is to obscure your footprints.
Welcome to the real world, brings new meaning to "stop the world I want
to get off".
Fight the good fight, its one thats already lost the hearts and minds of most of the participants. What you hope to fight is already institutionalised. At the end of the day there is now very little difference between any data out on the internet, that originates from
any source.
Because people don't want it... to much herd mentality going on.
Oh, good Lord. Your REAL NAME on the internet. Not like there isn't 200000 John Smith's out there. Come on.
and pissed off, and found this very, very poor form. No, the argument is the "Internet" doesn't hold. I rarely take part in FidoNet as a res and I'm skeptical of posting here.
Then leave. No one wants a cry baby that wants to stay hidden because they are hiding something or doing something illegal.
I see potential, but we need to to be accommodative of new social mores expectations, and set a high standard.
Dude, this is a BBS ... you knew what was expected in 1993. NOTHING has changed. Only the stupid mindset of people since then. All the ones
now want to run and hide.
I had to laugh watching Star Trek Picard the other day. They spoofed a scene from Star Trek 4 when they were on a bus (1986) and some burly
thug was playing some rap/death music on the bus. Spock had to volcan pinch him out to turn it off because he wouldn't after being asked. In Picard (when they went back to 2024) the same scene almost, and the thug was asked to turn off the crap music on the bus. He was like oh yeah, sorry, sorry, didn't mean to offend you, I just like the song, and then turned it off.
That's how society is today, a bunch of cry babies and people who HIDE from everything. Even the most dumbest thing int he world like having your REAL NAME on the internet. Seriously?! Grow up.
--- Renegade vY2Ka2
Wow. The inviting attitude shown here is exactly what I love about BBSing...(o_O) (if you're going to be sarcastic, do it right! ;)
Certainly, a lot has changed *outside* this arena. And a lot has changed *inside* as well, from what I can tell. My memories from 30 years ago
may not be perfect, because I still had the optimism of a child, but I definitely *don't* remember this much negativity!
Perhaps it's just a trait of our aging member base. Perhaps we really *are* becoming the grumpy old men that used to chase us out of their yards. I say 'we', because I'm feeling like I was pretty grumpy lately, too...I would like to blame someone else for that, but it wouldn't be realistic to do so. I am the only one responsible for my own behaviour.
Just like you, Exodus. (o_-)
Re: Re: SSH on BBSes
By: McDoob to StormTrooper on Sun Apr 03 2022 09:57 pm
You know the inflatable ones don't count?
Tell that to Leslie Neilson, in 'Airplane'! XD
Since there are some people here from Australia - I've heard that movie
is known as "Flying High" in Australia. (Can anyone confirm?)
That's not so much privacy as it is a barrier to entry: must have
computer and modem. Unless the sysop went to pains to scrutinize new users, pretty much anyone could come along and do whatever they wanted with what they saw there. Was it private in practice? Sure, probably.
In theory? No.
It changes a great deal. The barrier to entry has been obliterated. Connectedness has increased. Why would anyone assume that the BBS is *less* networked and discoverable today than in decades past?
Those steps are easy, especially with Synchronet. Some sysops may put their website online without pausing to consider message bases and privacy. Their thought process might end at "play door games from the browser".
It's not safe to assume privacy on some random BBS or message network. I have little sympathy for anyone who posts a message to a forum on the internet, without specific guarantee of privacy, in 2022, and later
learns to their dismay that it turns up in a web search.
That is my point of contention, or should that be, soreness, that sys
It's not safe to assume privacy on a message network. It assumes too
much about the motivations and values of other sysops and users. For everyone who thinks this stuff should be private, there's another who thinks that it should be searchable and free.
You can set up a BBS and lock it down to keep stuff off the public web, and you're reasonably assured of "privacy". It's unlikely that any user
or bot is going to start leaking stuff (but they could).
You can set up a message net and make it a rule that things be locked
down and kept "private", and then try to police that. Maybe you'll have some success, but it's less assured.
Beyond that, on message networks without specific rules or mechanisms in place to keep things private? It's incorrect to expect privacy in such a forum.
---
Now, you can setup an SSL connection with your hub, but that would mean every node connected to that hub would also need to use SSL. This also doesn't take into account Synchronet boards who over these messages bases via http:
However, since the node<>hub connection is in plain text and there are passwords exchanged....it would be nice if it were more secure.
I think you are missing the nuance here. You are equating any information which could be accessed by the public as equal, but they are not. I could befriend you on Facebook, and get your information, I could dig around and get your address, I can find a lot of things about you.
What you are missing is that the subtle differences of access make a BIG difference. It makes a big difference for automated systems, web crawlers, AI, etc. It makes a big difference if a web search indexes it or not. I get that someone, if they knew I posted here, could create an account and extract the data, but Google will not do that, neither would any other crawler which is trying to profile.
Wrong, demonstrably so. We have encryption which allows people to ferry data from one network node to another. Again, to use an analogy, it is the difference between sending a message through the post on a postcard, or in an envelope.
The fact there are 'public' servers ferrying the data is irrelevant. We can choose privacy by means of encryption, where only the intended recipients can make sense of the message.
People do this ALL the time. People access their bank accounts over the Internet, surely you are not suggesting this is "public" information, are you?
No excuse for those who know better to set a better example. I don't care for your defeatist attitude at all.
Correct, the effect was the same. If I posted a message to a friend on Paranoimia BBS, or even engaged in thread, it wasn't the same as tweeting it to the world.
Dude, this is a BBS ... you knew what was expected in 1993. NOTHING
your REAL NAME on the internet. Seriously?! Grow up.
I don't care for your snarky attitude, nor your contemptuous assertion of the "if you are doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide" fallacy.
You know the inflatable ones don't count?
Tell that to Leslie Neilson, in 'Airplane'! XD
Since there are some people here from Australia - I've heard that movie is known as "Flying High" in Australia. (Can anyone confirm?)
Perhaps I am biased because I have young children, and I'm worried about them inadvertently broadcasting information about themselves. They need to
That is not to say a sysop cannot choose to enable web access, thereby making the discussion world visible, but they have an obligation to users to make it clear to users from the start, that this is what they are doing.
Simply accessing the BBS by TCP/IP can NOT be taken as an understanding the discussion is totally public.
That is fine, but one should not have to "assume". They should now so they can make an informed choice, and post with knowledge.
Perhaps I am biased because I have young children, and I'm worried
about them inadvertently broadcasting information about themselves.
They need to
I have a two year old kid, and when the time comes he'll be well informed and frequently reminded about these matters. Particularly when it comes to the long memory of the internet and his own responsibility for his actions.
Hub 3 supports *BOTH* SSL and non-SSL connections. SSL is via port
24553. I think hubs 1 and 4 do to - so no, not every node connected to that hub would also need SSL (unless you were meaning something else).
I assume you're referring to fsxnet. I connect to hub3.
What changes do I need to make to connect with SSL?
--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/24 (Linux/64)
Hub 3 supports *BOTH* SSL and non-SSL connections. SSL is via port 24553. I think hubs 1 and 4 do to - so no, not every node connected to that hub would also need SSL (unless you were meaning
something else).
I assume you're referring to fsxnet. I connect to hub3.
What changes do I need to make to connect with SSL?
Spectre wrote to boraxman <=-
I think you are missing the nuance here. You are equating any information which could be accessed by the public as equal, but they are not. I could befriend you on Facebook, and get your information, I could dig around and get your address, I can find a lot of things about you.
Then surely that would be public information. But you won't find any, because there's none out there on me.
What you are missing is that the subtle differences of access make a BIG difference. It makes a big difference for automated systems, web crawlers, AI, etc. It makes a big difference if a web search indexes it or not. I get that someone, if they knew I posted here, could create an account and extract the data, but Google will not do that, neither would any other crawler which is trying to profile.
That's simply by obscurity, or the lack of perceived value in the
minimal data that is available here. If there was perceived value it'd
be mined as relentlessly as anywhere else.
Wrong, demonstrably so. We have encryption which allows people to ferry data from one network node to another. Again, to use an analogy, it is the difference between sending a message through the post on a postcard, or in an envelope.
Sure we have encryption, but it'll only be safe for so long.. for arguments sake WPA2 is already compromised.. yet we all still use
wifi.. the longer its in use the further it will become compromised though.
The postcard analogy is bad too, you're describing wildly different
types of data. Anything posted to a BBS cannot by nature be defined as something in a envelope. Anyone with the will can read it, and some
them will make it available to those that don't.
The fact there are 'public' servers ferrying the data is irrelevant. We can choose privacy by means of encryption, where only the intended recipients can make sense of the message.
But thats not the data you're putting out there on a BBS, faceplant or
any other public service is it? To me you appear to be confusing public carriage encrypted or otherwise, with a public medium being the service offered.
People do this ALL the time. People access their bank accounts over the Internet, surely you are not suggesting this is "public" information, are you?
Its at risk during transit encrypted or otherwise. However it is essentially private between the said service and the user, otherwise
its value is not there. But to equate that with data put on a public service, thats a completely different kettle of fish.
No excuse for those who know better to set a better example. I don't care for your defeatist attitude at all.
Realistic attitude perhaps? I still find your idea naive.
Andre wrote to boraxman <=-
Correct, the effect was the same. If I posted a message to a friend on Paranoimia BBS, or even engaged in thread, it wasn't the same as tweeting it to the world.
There's a fundamental difference between your position, and even those
who would agree with you about privacy (it's important) and large corporations (unethical and run by morons).
We always understood that posting on message boards was not private. In fact, in the early days it was worse in some ways because you knew some
of those people in the real world, and they knew people that you knew.
The things you wrote could have personal implications. Now? It goes
into your uber provile and you get more invasive advertising, and potentially in the future financial insurance, healthcare, or
government effects.
But of all the things you and your household do on the internet... your searches, the pages you view with your shared IP, the tokens that track all of your phones when you leave the house and use the internet, all
your data that is sold and shared, your map/wifi data, etc. ..... What
you write on Fidonet is smaller than a drop in the bucket. It's more
like one molecule in the bucket.
BBS software has always been massively insecure. Passwords have always been stored in plaintext. Sysops have always had full access to your personal mail. Not much later, posts were sent all over WWIV, Fidonet, DOVE-net, and many more. There is simply no expectation of privacy and there never has been any.
As for gating your posts to the internet? Again, it's been done for decades. You are posting on a "public" forum... that's literally the
point of a BBS. I would expect that my private BBS email/netmail isn't
put on the web interface to be crawled by search engines, but that's
the extent of my privacy expectations.
Spectre wrote to boraxman <=-
Dude, this is a BBS ... you knew what was expected in 1993. NOTHING
He's for the most part right you want the same type of use you had of a BBS back in the 90's, 80's maybe even but what was public then, all be
it to the minority computer nerd set is now on a different carriage of service and that makes it all the more public. If you don't like it, don't use it is valid if a bit simplistic.
your REAL NAME on the internet. Seriously?! Grow up.
Also valid, if you don't want the information out there, don't use it. You'll be lucky to find trace of me anywhere, I still have that
"healthy" paranoia from 80's computer studies. All you'll find are odd aliases, stacked on top of other aliases.
I don't care for your snarky attitude, nor your contemptuous assertion of the "if you are doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide" fallacy.
Yeah I'm not a fan of that argument either.. it's a bit like a lot of americans no I can't quote a decent source, considering someone guilty
of something by pleading the Fifth Amendment. But it does put forward
the notion if you share something, especially on any sort of public
forum even if its reach is further than you expect, fair game. To whit,
I share nothing.
echicken wrote to boraxman <=-
Re: Re: SSH on BBSes
By: boraxman to echicken on Mon Apr 04 2022 22:32:20
Perhaps I am biased because I have young children, and I'm worried about them inadvertently broadcasting information about themselves. They need to
I have a two year old kid, and when the time comes he'll be well
informed and frequently reminded about these matters. Particularly when
it comes to the long memory of the internet and his own responsibility
for his actions.
That is not to say a sysop cannot choose to enable web access, thereby making the discussion world visible, but they have an obligation to users to make it clear to users from the start, that this is what they are doing.
They have no such obligation. That's in your head. It's a *good* idea
and it would be *very nice* if they informed their users, but as far as
I know they are not required to do so.
I'm happy to be proven wrong if there are laws on the books about this. Otherwise, if you hold people to unwritten rules you're setting
yourself up for disappointment.
Simply accessing the BBS by TCP/IP can NOT be taken as an understanding the discussion is totally public.
As much as the sysop *should* express this to the user, it is also the user's responsibility to do their own research. The fact that they're using an internet service that they're obviously not very familiar with should be a huge red flag to them, if they care.
Most people *don't* care. Truly. The social media landscape would be
very different today if anybody actually gave a shit.
That is fine, but one should not have to "assume". They should now so they can make an informed choice, and post with knowledge.
Exactly. In the absence of that information being pushed at them, they should seek it out. It's pretty easy to do a web search and determine
that posts to fsxnet are very visible.
Trusting that people share your ideals and idealism is a recipe for heartbreak. People who are concerned should take a cautious and
realistic approach.
I'm not saying you're wrong to want this, but if you expect it ...
well.
I think there is misunderstanding about the argument. People are taking it as a statement of how things are now, whereas what I'm arguing
is what we should be working towards.
This is what we should be working towards. Does this involve BBS's? Maybe, maybe not. A BBS which is open to all involved, but invisible to others is indeed possible. Is this a future model, who knows? But we should at least be discussings ways we can ameliorate this rather poor state we are in at the moment.
You seem to misunderstand my argument. It isn't denying that people can create accounts, I am arguing there is VALUE in BBS's which aren't
overly public. This is something the technology can easily do, to
provide an alternative.
[snip]
You're simply stating "as is" without thinking "what could be".
It's simply a statement that a particular 'semi-private' level of group communication can easily be done, and would be desired by some.
Some people lack imagination.
Spectre wrote to boraxman <=-
50 shades of gravy
Spectre wrote to boraxman <=-
I think there is misunderstanding about the argument. People are taking it as a statement of how things are now, whereas what I'm arguing
is what we should be working towards.
Shrug, where you want to get to, is I feel naive... 50 shades of gravy
for privacy? That's never going to work very well. The most basic form
of privacy since the day dot is not to share... as they saying goes a secret shared is a secret no more. Perhaps you're to much the idealist.
Spec
Andre wrote to boraxman <=-
This is what we should be working towards. Does this involve BBS's? Maybe, maybe not. A BBS which is open to all involved, but invisible to others is indeed possible. Is this a future model, who knows? But we should at least be discussings ways we can ameliorate this rather poor state we are in at the moment.
Let's be clear about what you're asking. There is this community of hobbiests whose common interest is a vintage and nostalgic messaging platform, who have been communicating under this same social contract around sysop/user and near-anarchy. You want them to change behavior
and expectations, that have been entrenched sometime between BBS-networking and usenet gateways, to change their philsophies about
the whole thing and then pile hundreds (maybe thousands) of hours of effort into modernizing BBS software, messaging protocols, developing federated access between different systems, and then roll that out to hundreds of systems people run out of their homes.
There is *nothing* stopping you from doing this work yourself and
creating a network like you're describing of likeminded BBS operators.
You could even try to find some of them that would help develop it. But that's really where this discussion should end.
This is a hobby. Nothing more. BBS will never be more relevant than
they currently are (enjoyment and nostalgia).
tenser wrote to boraxman <=-
On 05 Apr 2022 at 10:48p, boraxman pondered and said...
You seem to misunderstand my argument. It isn't denying that people can create accounts, I am arguing there is VALUE in BBS's which aren't
overly public. This is something the technology can easily do, to
provide an alternative.
[snip]
You're simply stating "as is" without thinking "what could be".
It's simply a statement that a particular 'semi-private' level of group communication can easily be done, and would be desired by some.
Some people lack imagination.
I fail to see why that can't be done using Internet standard
protocols. People behave as if the BBS is somehow inherently
better suited to private communications, but really, it isn't.
Private NNTP hierarchies, web sites, etc, are all trivial in
this day and age.
That is not to say a sysop cannot choose to enable web access, thereby making the discussion world visible, but they have an obligation to use to make it clear to users from the start, that this is what they are doing.
They have no such obligation. That's in your head. It's a *good* idea and it would be *very nice* if they informed their users, but as far as I know they are not required to do so.
Haven't asked anyone to do anything. It's more a discussion of how times have changed, new expectations. I wrote a response which I lost, so I'll try and recap.
One should look at the EU, and how they are putting in stricter regulation. think a lot of this attitude against this "idealism" is US/Northern European centric, where the culture is very laissez faire. Europeans are ahead of th curve here I think and understand the need for greater controls and responsibilities.
And as I mentioned in my last post, the security and privacy world has advanced hugely in the last few decades, and BBS software did not keep
up. So in a way, a sort of technical debt is instantly created by
this mish mash of antique and semi-modern systems up to date would be like asking MS to provide updates for Win 3.11
One other matter is ownership of the underlying system. As I mentioned
in a previous response, Parler found out the hardway what happens when
you use someone elses servers. Empowerment comes from avoiding heteronomy, being in full control, and BBS typically are not only the creations of private individuals, but those individuals also have full control over the underlying server, software and hardware which means
they are not subject to outside requirements and terms and conditions. That isn't necessarily the case with a Web site, unless you host it yourself. NNTP and Web Sites can also be hosted yourself, but set up is
a little more involved.
And as I mentioned in my last post, the security and privacy world has advanced hugely in the last few decades, and BBS software did not keep
up. So in a way, a sort of technical debt is instantly created by
choosing a platform (BBS) that doesn't in any way meet the need you've described. It would be much, much faster to start from scratch.
this mish mash of antique and semi-modern systems up to date would
be like asking MS to provide updates for Win 3.11
To be fair, there is a File Explorer on the Windows Store. Not quite Win3.11, but not much newer.
It looks like there are a lot of file explorers on the Microsoft store.. Some don't have very detailed descriptions (even if they charge a fee for it).
It looks like there are a lot of file explorers on the Microsoft
store.. Some don't have very detailed descriptions (even if they
charge a fee for it).
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/p/windows-file-manager/9p7vbbbc49rb
I rarely use the Microsoft Store to find software in Windows. I guess
I'm just used to the usual way of finding software with a web search engine.
I can speak for those within the EU, but for those outside of it, we're not subject to GDPR. Oversimplified, we don't monitor EU citizens and we're not selling anything to them.
And as I mentioned in my last post, the security and privacy world has advanced hugely in the last few decades, and BBS software did not keep up. So in a way, a sort of technical debt is instantly created by
You could probably go so far as to say obsoleted. Generally trying to make this mish mash of antique and semi-modern systems up to date would be like asking MS to provide updates for Win 3.11
The only real way to manage all this would be to start again, but then you lose most of that which probably drives people to use/run it now, nostalgia.
ST
It seems that a lot of BBSes are hosted on VPSes provided by
cloud providers. Surely these are susceptible to the same sort
of hosting issues you mention above. Similarly, at least one
of the more popular BBS packages is closed-source; users are
at the whim of its author.
That is a fair point. Then again, there is this pretension from GDPR authorities that foreigner entities must comply with the GDPR when serving EU citizens, "or else".
I still don't know what the "or else" would be. Hmmm…
To be fair, there is a File Explorer on the Windows Store. Not quite Win3.11, but not much newer.
I am not here for nostalgia. I am here becuse I like terminal message boards.
I think what you're doing can only be one of two things (not talking
about intent, just about ultimate end state)...
1. A discussion on how BBS software and networks will never be able to address this other concern I have. What a disappointment.
2. We need to make BBS software and networks meet this concern I have.
How can we go about that?
Now if I add intent, I don't think you're doing #1. I think you're doing #2. And I think that is just misaligned to the community.
And as I mentioned in my last post, the security and privacy world has advanced hugely in the last few decades, and BBS software did not keep
up. So in a way, a sort of technical debt is instantly created by
choosing a platform (BBS) that doesn't in any way meet the need you've described. It would be much, much faster to start from scratch.
One should look at the EU, and how they are putting in stricter regulat think a lot of this attitude against this "idealism" is US/Northern Eur centric, where the culture is very laissez faire. Europeans are ahead curve here I think and understand the need for greater controls and responsibilities.
The European solution is to make it so you need a data protection
delegate to keep an automated archive even if you are not sharing any information with third parties.
The organism in charge of handling GDPR sanctions is officially
overloaded with bullshit sanctions.
The current scene in Europe is clearly designed for Big Companies which can afford to outsource the legals of GDPR methods, check the boxes, run an anual audit, and keep selling people's data away. Meanwhile your mom-and-dad business is operating illegaly because they don't know (or
can afford) better and are liable to hefty fines for stupid violations.
The place I work for once had an incident with a debt collection agency. When they phoned the debt collectors and asked them for information regarding the debt we supposedly owed, they could not do so because it involved a patient and therefore was unshareable personal data.
We get cookie laws and heavy ToS documents nobody reads as part of the GDPR agreement but we barely get any of the real problems solved at all. In typical Spaniard style, we have thrown in resource intensive solution which does not solve 10% of the problem and we are calling it an
absolute success.
On 06 Apr 2022 at 10:38p, boraxman pondered and said...
One other matter is ownership of the underlying system. As I mention in a previous response, Parler found out the hardway what happens whe you use someone elses servers. Empowerment comes from avoiding heteronomy, being in full control, and BBS typically are not only the creations of private individuals, but those individuals also have ful control over the underlying server, software and hardware which means they are not subject to outside requirements and terms and conditions That isn't necessarily the case with a Web site, unless you host it yourself. NNTP and Web Sites can also be hosted yourself, but set up a little more involved.
So the argument is that it's easier to set up a BBS than run
a web or NNTP server oneself?
It seems that a lot of BBSes are hosted on VPSes provided by
cloud providers. Surely these are susceptible to the same sort
of hosting issues you mention above. Similarly, at least one
of the more popular BBS packages is closed-source; users are
at the whim of its author.
Finally, even if one runs one's own servers, there are connectivity
issues that must be dealt with. Pretty much all ISPs these days
have an AUP.
As for parler, well...if someone wants to wrestle in a dumpster,
one should expect to be covered with trash.
--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/24 (Linux/64)
And as I mentioned in my last post, the security and privacy world advanced hugely in the last few decades, and BBS software did not up. So in a way, a sort of technical debt is instantly created by
You could probably go so far as to say obsoleted. Generally trying to m this mish mash of antique and semi-modern systems up to date would be l asking MS to provide updates for Win 3.11
The only real way to manage all this would be to start again, but then lose most of that which probably drives people to use/run it now, nosta
ST
I am not here for nostalgia. I am here becuse I like terminal message boards.
I didn't grow up with this tech at all.
I feel ya there, Nightfox. I don't think I've ever visited the Microsoft Store unless I was forced to by Microsoft's blatant anti-competitive tricks...
That is a fair point. Then again, there is this pretension from GDPR authorities that foreigner entities must comply with the GDPR when
serving EU citizens, "or else".
I am not here for nostalgia. I am here becuse I like terminal message boards.
That is a fair point. Then again, there is this pretension from GDPR authoriti
that foreigner entities must comply with the GDPR when
serving EU citizens, "or else".
I think BBSes are fairly immune to GDPR for a few reasons:
1) Generally, BBSes are hobbies, not commercial entities.
2) BBSes are small potatoes and therefore not worth pursuing.
3) BBSes aren't actively storing/mining personal data. Users can, for the most part
control what information they share with a BBS.
I am not here for nostalgia. I am here becuse I like terminal message boards.
I am here for both; I ran a board in the 90s, and somehow, terminal message boards are easier to read, and at least for the time being, I
find the content far more stimulating and personal than internet forums
or Faceplant and the like.
That is a fair point. Then again, there is this pretension from GD authoriti
that foreigner entities must comply with the GDPR when
serving EU citizens, "or else".
I think BBSes are fairly immune to GDPR for a few reasons:
1) Generally, BBSes are hobbies, not commercial entities.
2) BBSes are small potatoes and therefore not worth pursuing.
3) BBSes aren't actively storing/mining personal data. Users can, for t most part
control what information they share with a BBS.
I don't know of the baseline set by the GDPR, but Spanish implementation is that it
does not matter whether it is a commertial entity or not.
Being a small violator does not make it legal. At best it makes it so small that
nobody cares whether it is legal or not (which is, precisely, my original point: that
operators themselves don't give a damn, and that is good)
3) depends on the BBS implementation. Certainly I get detailed
information of failed
logins, which means the BBS package I call to actively registers
activity.
--
boraxman wrote to 2twisty <=-
I prefer the fixed font, the light text on black background, and the
lack of UI elements. Having the window (or the entire screen)
dedicated to the task at hand so you can focus. Some editors on some BBS's aren't that great (the Mystic one is one of the best), but you
can also download a QWK packet and use your own editor, which is
another usability win.
Now that I have a ultrawide monitor, I prefer running in a windowed session; there's only so far you can stretch fonts.
BBS may be hosted on random VPS, but the point is that it is easy to
pack your toys and move them elsewhere if your VPS goes crazy or
censorful for whatever reason. You can run many modern BBS packages in commodity operating systems.
This is in heavy contrast with massive applications which are tailored
to the computing platform they run on, using AWS exclusive facilities or whatever. If you are kicked of one of those you will have to re-engineer your application. It is not as easy to move a mega-application like
Parler from a provider with which it is tightly integrated as it is for somebody to tar -czf your BBS bundle and move it somewhere else.
I think it is yes, at least from my experience. I used mystic, and it
was dead simple to get running. Configuration was a little harder, but think, you get chat, message board and file exchange all out of the box.
I prefer the fixed font, the light text on black background, and the lack of UI elements. Having the window (or the entire screen) dedicated to the task at hand so you can focus. Some editors on some BBS's aren't that great (the Mystic one is one of the best), but you can also download a QWK packet and use your own editor, which is another usability win.
I recreated my old DOS/QWK environment in a full-screen DOSBOX session, using Qedit as an editor and all the old tools I used back in the day. I liked the focus it provided, having one full-screen session and no cut/paste between the internet and my DOS window.
Now that I have a ultrawide monitor, I prefer running in a windowed session; there's only so far you can stretch fonts.
There are worse problems to have.
Really? Most Unix/Linux distros come with all of that
stuff out of the box, or easily installable -- even by
the local package system. Ntalkd, or a small ircd,
newts or even a small NNTP server, and sftp are trivial.
Lots of systems even have nice clients for all of the
above.
I think that people are enamored of the captive interface
provided by most BBS packages, but it's not necessary and
for many things gets in the way.
poindexter FORTRAN wrote to boraxman <=-
I recreated my old DOS/QWK environment in a full-screen DOSBOX session, using Qedit as an editor and all the old tools I used back in the day.
I liked the focus it provided, having one full-screen session and no cut/paste between the internet and my DOS window.
Andre wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
You'd think so, but frequently enough I see people complain that some part/module of Sync doesn't support some ridiculous number of columns.
The problem is they aren't all integrated in the one portal,
and I wouldn't want to expose ntalkd to the internet.
They work great for people who can navigate unix and belong to the same system. This is what the public unices, like rawtext.club do. But you are still running separate programs, whereas with a BBS, its all menu driven.
If one thinks of a timesharing system as a "portal" then
they are. The point being that the exact semantics are
somewhat open for interpretation.
and I wouldn't want to expose ntalkd to the internet.
You don't _have_ to. You can just run it against localhost.
You could even just use `write`.
They work great for people who can navigate unix and belong to the sa system. This is what the public unices, like rawtext.club do. But y are still running separate programs, whereas with a BBS, its all menu driven.
One can trivially create menu interfaces for Unix-like systems;
we did this on Grex and it an ~200 line Go program.
Fixating on the captive BBS experience misses the forest for
the trees. The power and flexibility of what you get out of a
timesharing system is much greater than what you get out of
any BBS package. Moreover, it can be customized by the user
in a way that a BBS never can, and systems can be federated
using open protocols; don't like the default message editor?
No problem; just use a different one.
Fixating on the captive BBS experience misses the forest for
the trees. The power and flexibility of what you get out of a
timesharing system is much greater than what you get out of
any BBS package. Moreover, it can be customized by the user
in a way that a BBS never can, and systems can be federated
using open protocols; don't like the default message editor?
No problem; just use a different one.
Agree, I haven't seen comparable software set ups but I'm sure it can be mad that way. For me, I would prefer the Timesharing environment, but for other they would be lost, even with an interface. A lot of people really struggle with systems when it doesn't behave exactly as predicted.
I'd be interested to see this frontend.
Fixating on the captive BBS experience misses the forest for
the trees. The power and flexibility of what you get out of a timesharing system is much greater than what you get out of
any BBS package. Moreover, it can be customized by the user
in a way that a BBS never can, and systems can be federated
using open protocols; don't like the default message editor?
No problem; just use a different one.
Agree, I haven't seen comparable software set ups but I'm sure it can be made that way. For me, I would prefer the Timesharing environment, but for others, they would be lost, even with an interface. A lot of people really struggle with systems when it doesn't behave exactly as predicted.
I'd be interested to see this frontend.
Re: Re: SSH on BBSes
By: tenser to boraxman on Wed Apr 13 2022 03:54 am
Fixating on the captive BBS experience misses the forest for
the trees. The power and flexibility of what you get out of a timesharing system is much greater than what you get out of
any BBS package. Moreover, it can be customized by the user
in a way that a BBS never can, and systems can be federated
using open protocols; don't like the default message editor?
No problem; just use a different one.
I often think this myself.
But then BBS packages offer convenience for the administrator, that he
can deploy a "thing" with somehow automated user management which won't let the users access arbitrary resources within the machine.
I can build a telnet interface capable of letting people connect and send messages back and forth using traditional Unix utilities, but then I
also have to set permissions for the system users involved and probably build some unveil() and pledge() wrappers.
A BBS package is ready to go. A portal you have to deploy takes time.
He also allowed access to legacy BSD 2.X systems within a controled network.
tenser wrote to Arelor <=-
In the local region, I give hams access to a number of
systems via AX.25: Multics, TOPS-20, 7th Edition Unix,
4.3BSD, a modern version of DragonFly, RSTS/E, VAX/VMS,
VM/CMS and CDC Cyber NOS. Well, not so much VM/CMS as
that requires 3270, which isn't that easy over AX.25,
but I do give accounts on the mainframe.
I've wanted to make a BBS command shell that mimicked the appearance of a mainframe OS on an ASCII terminal. I'm thinking OS/400 might be the way to go.
I've wanted to make a BBS command shell that mimicked the appearance of
a mainframe OS on an ASCII terminal. I'm thinking OS/400 might be the
way to go.
On 13 Apr 2022 at 07:31a, Arelor pondered and said...
He also allowed access to legacy BSD 2.X systems within a controled network.
In the local region, I give hams access to a number of
systems via AX.25: Multics, TOPS-20, 7th Edition Unix,
4.3BSD, a modern version of DragonFly, RSTS/E, VAX/VMS,
VM/CMS and CDC Cyber NOS. Well, not so much VM/CMS as
that requires 3270, which isn't that easy over AX.25,
but I do give accounts on the mainframe.
It's fun, but almost no one uses it. People used to
traffic BBSes can't figure it out. :-)
By: tenser to Arelor on Thu Apr 14 2022 10:02 am
In the local region, I give hams access to a number of
systems via AX.25: Multics, TOPS-20, 7th Edition Unix,
4.3BSD, a modern version of DragonFly, RSTS/E, VAX/VMS,
VM/CMS and CDC Cyber NOS. Well, not so much VM/CMS as
that requires 3270, which isn't that easy over AX.25,
but I do give accounts on the mainframe.
It's fun, but almost no one uses it. People used to
traffic BBSes can't figure it out. :-)
That is very cool. Are you using SHIM for the early Unices?
Offering Dragonfly is a weird choice for a retro themed offering since
it is modern. I got a DVD with Dragonfly with the current Linux Magazine :-)
traffic handling; that's fine, but means if you aren't running
JNOS, FBB or BPQ32, people don't know what to do with you.
Fixating on the captive BBS experience misses the forest for
the trees. The power and flexibility of what you get out of a timesharing system is much greater than what you get out of
any BBS package. Moreover, it can be customized by the user
in a way that a BBS never can, and systems can be federated
using open protocols; don't like the default message editor?
No problem; just use a different one.
I often think this myself.
But then BBS packages offer convenience for the administrator, that he
can deploy a "thing" with somehow automated user management which won't let the users access arbitrary resources within the machine.
I can build a telnet interface capable of letting people connect and send messages back and forth using traditional Unix utilities, but then I
also have to set permissions for the system users involved and probably build some unveil() and pledge() wrappers.
A BBS package is ready to go. A portal you have to deploy takes time.
It sounds as a fun project though.
Agree, I haven't seen comparable software set ups but I'm sure it can made that way. For me, I would prefer the Timesharing environment, b for others, they would be lost, even with an interface. A lot of peo really struggle with systems when it doesn't behave exactly as predic
I'd be interested to see this frontend.
Well, login to `newuser@grex.org` via SSH and you can create
an account and check it out. Let me know what you're username
is, and I'll validate your account and then you can access it
from the shell by typing, `menu`.
--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/24 (Linux/64)
I often think this myself.
But then BBS packages offer convenience for the administrator, that h can deploy a "thing" with somehow automated user management which won let the users access arbitrary resources within the machine.
I mean, I kind of want that. :-) These machines are
there to be used. The average computer running a BBS,
even a li'l Raspberry Pi, is seriously undersubscribed.
It almost feels like a waste.
I suppose it depends on whether you want to keep users
sandboxed into a small part of the system or not. But
I admit that once you let them have access to a shell,
you have a much larger administrative burden.
I mean, I kind of want that. :-) These machines are
there to be used. The average computer running a BBS,
even a li'l Raspberry Pi, is seriously undersubscribed.
It almost feels like a waste.
We have so much computing power at our disposal, even on a Raspberry Pi, so much bandwidth, it seems kind if silly we don't employ it.
Tech really has taken a turn for the worse, with the "consumer" model of devices and apps. We have the power to run our own social networks, to handle our own communications, and yet, we centralise it all in the hands of Big Tech.
Sometimes (more often than not), the vision of making computers user-friendly, ubiquitous and accessible was a mistake.
boraxman wrote to tenser <=-
Tech really has taken a turn for the worse, with the "consumer" model
of devices and apps. We have the power to run our own social networks,
to handle our own communications, and yet, we centralise it all in the hands of Big Tech.
Sometimes (more often than not), the vision of making computers user-friendly, ubiquitous and accessible was a mistake.
The pubnixes don't really sandbox you that much, you can compile code,
run programs, write shell scripts. As long as the permissions are initially set up right, the administrative burden wouldn't be much greater. More a matter of just monitoring and keeping out
troublemakers.
Tech really has taken a turn for the worse, with the "consumer" model devices and apps. We have the power to run our own social networks, t handle our own communications, and yet, we centralise it all in the h of Big Tech.
Sometimes (more often than not), the vision of making computers user-friendly, ubiquitous and accessible was a mistake.
I'm not sure about that.. Computers have becomne such useful tools for many things. For a long time now, I've owned a computer and have used them for work, entertainment, financial tracking & other notes, work, etc..
Although we have the power to run our own social networks &
communication, as you say, I think the reason that's not very common is that not very many people know how. I run a BBS, and I suppose that
could be considered a type of social network, but not many people these days seem to care or even know what a BBS is anymore.
Also, it may make more sense to have a big company do that since more people would use a single social networking site rather than a bunch of distributed social networking sites.
For a while it seemed most people had a desktop PC at home, and I've
been a bit surprised these days to hear some people don't even have a laptop and just use their smartphone and/or tablet, if anything. Even
as useful as computers are, it seems many people still don't really know how to use them well or don't have a use for them except for smartphones
& tablets.
He says, on a BBS networked on home machines around the world. :)
It'd be interesting to come up with a social network platform that followed the Skype model, where servers just kept up with lists of
other servers instead of hosting the content. Peers would pull down the content. Throw some torrent-like capabilities in there as well to make peers able to talk to each other.
You'd need an encrypted blob on your home PC, otherwise some jerk would try to sue people for content they didn't like hosted on your home PC. And, then you'd need to deal with having encrypted content sitting on your PC.
making computers pF> bo> user-friendly, ubiquitous and accessible was a mistake. pF>Sometimes (more often than not), the vision of
The pubnixes don't really sandbox you that much, you can compile code run programs, write shell scripts. As long as the permissions are initially set up right, the administrative burden wouldn't be much greater. More a matter of just monitoring and keeping out troublemakers.
I'm having a lot of fun on the tildes - finally learning tmux, hand-hacking HTML again, playing with gemini, rediscovering IRC, and reliving my youth.
Sometimes (more often than not), the vision of making computers user-friendly, ubiquitous and accessible was a mistake.
I'm not sure about that.. Computers have becomne such useful tools for many things. For a long time now, I've owned a computer and have used them for work, entertainment, financial tracking & other notes, work, etc..
Although we have the power to run our own social networks & communication, a you say, I think the reason that's not very common is that not very many peo know how. I run a BBS, and I suppose that could be considered a type of soc network, but not many people these days seem to care or even know what a BBS anymore.
Also, it may make more sense to have a big company do that since more people would use a single social networking site rather than a bunch of distributed social networking sites.
For a while it seemed most people had a desktop PC at home, and I've been a surprised these days to hear some people don't even have a laptop and just u their smartphone and/or tablet, if anything. Even as useful as computers ar it seems many people still don't really know how to use them well or don't h a use for them except for smartphones & tablets.
Nightfox
Tech really has taken a turn for the worse, with the "consumer" model of devices and apps. We have the power to run our own social networks, to handle our own communications, and yet, we centralise it all in the hands of Big Tech.
He says, on a BBS networked on home machines around the world. :)
The Internet itself is great, but that is old tech, and I should clarify. T real decline is in the software ecosystem, though the closing-off of hardwar is also a problem
The fact that many people don't know how to use them, and can only "consume content" on a smartphone, is to me, evidence of how tech has taken a turn for the worse. There are piles of electronic, hazardous landfill for each person, and the result is tech used mostly for inane
WE have no autonomy, no knowledge of how to computer, instead the masses lurch from controlled solution to controlled solution. It's as if all the work creating solutions in the last 40 years is for nothing, because no one can use them, only the latest web-based cloud tool.
The vision of Bill Gates was a bunch of dumb consumers, and that is what we have. People who just have entertainment devices, but can't make them do ANYTHING except the apps that Apple/Google let into their ecosystem.
run their business off a Faceberg page, and then are at the mercy of a company which can cut them off (and Faceberg did that in Australia when they had a spat with the government). Computers thrown into landfill,
I think this generates the wrong sort of expectation from both consumers and, sometimes, manufacturers.
An industrial computing resource is a complex tool and should be used by trained personal _only_. This does not mean that person has to be an IT expert, far from it, but he should know what the heck he is doing. It is like driving a car: you are not expected to be a car mechanic of an Engineer to use a car, but you are supposed to know how to use the car and to be able to do some routine maintenance yourself.
The problem is that many domestic users enjoy zero-training appliances at home and, as a result, will demand everything else being zero-training (and will regard anything which is not as outdated tech).
The Internet, as infrastructure, is very decentralized itself. It is called The Network of Networks because it is built up by small networks linked together and ran by different administrators. I think it is quite cool, if you ask me. There are a number of choke points but even those
are solvable if need be.
And yes, boraxman likes BBS precisely because they are not a centralized platform, but his point is that most people just uses silo-styled
latforms controled by a single entity for socializing.
The Internet itself is great, but that is old tech, and I should clarif real decline is in the software ecosystem, though the closing-off of ha is also a problem
Nothing wrong with old technology. I recentñly found myself playing
with some BSD source code from a modern OS and found that many of its files had copyrights dating back to the 80s or earlier. Old algorythms that you can still use 30 or 40 years after they were created... such longevity is a testament to their quality.
With the Internet I think the infrastructure is mostly fine. It is what
we build on top of such infrastructure that sucks.
--
In a way, it seems a bit bizarre to me that still a lot of people don't have or don't know how to use computers these days. It seemed like computers were booming, especially in the late 90s to 2000s, and it
seemed like more and more people were learning how to use computers (as people had to do) to do their work. Word processing software and
printers had replaced hand-written documents (I used my computer a lot
in high school and college to write reports), financial tracking can be easily done on a computer, email and instant messengers made it easy to contact people, etc.. I figured computer skills would be fairly common now, but I guess not.
People should still learn basic concepts, such as what files are, directories, how to interpret file sizes, where files go, copying and moving, how to create and extract archives. Also some basic programming, perhaps python but I'm not sure. BASIC was ubiquitous when I was young, so if you learned that, you could get your computer to do whatever computation you wanted. I'm not sure what the modern equivalent is, and perhaps the fact there isn't one is a problem.
And this is where things went wrong, we went from computers which by default when you started them, you could program and instruct, to ones which are now platforms, only a host for someone elses program.
It seems it has been an industry goal to make computers easy to use though. had heard that when Apple was working on their Macintosh, they wanted the Ma to basically be like an appliance - something that could be placed anywhere the home and used easily. Apple seemed to try to make things easy to use, a some people do tend to think things "just work" with a Mac.
Microsoft and IBM were similar in the 80s and 90s - First they had the DOS operating systems, and then wanted to make computers easier to use with operating systems like Windows and OS/2. Windows 95 was really hyped up whe it was released, as it was a significant change from Windows 3.1, and it see Microsoft was trying to make PCs easier to use with Windows 95.
Nightfox
Re: Re: SSH on BBSes
By: boraxman to Nightfox on Sun Apr 17 2022 01:09 pm
People should still learn basic concepts, such as what files are, directories, how to interpret file sizes, where files go, copying and moving, how to create and extract archives. Also some basic programming perhaps python but I'm not sure. BASIC was ubiquitous when I was young, if you learned that, you could get your computer to do whatever computation you wanted. I'm not sure what the modern equivalent is, and perhaps the fact there isn't one is a problem.
And this is where things went wrong, we went from computers which by default when you started them, you could program and instruct, to ones which are now platforms, only a host for someone elses program.
I don't think people should have to know how to program in order to use a computer, but it's good to know the basic concepts about what files & directories are, how to run programs, etc.. IMO, knowing how to program vs. using a computer is like having mechanic skills vs. just knowing how to driv car. You don't have to be a mechanic to drive a car - and I don't think a computer user would necessarily have to know how to write software. But the more you know, more power to you. Computer operating systems these days at least have some kind of scripting language - Linux and Mac OS let you write Bash scripts, at least; Windows has its batch language and now PowerShell (starting a few versions back).
Nightfox
It seems it has been an industry goal to make computers easy to use tho had heard that when Apple was working on their Macintosh, they wanted t to basically be like an appliance - something that could be placed anyw the home and used easily. Apple seemed to try to make things easy to u some people do tend to think things "just work" with a Mac.
Microsoft and IBM were similar in the 80s and 90s - First they had the operating systems, and then wanted to make computers easier to use with operating systems like Windows and OS/2. Windows 95 was really hyped u it was released, as it was a significant change from Windows 3.1, and i Microsoft was trying to make PCs easier to use with Windows 95.
Nightfox
If you are a company selling domestic equipment for general use, you
want to be able to sell as much as possiblñe regardless of the ability
of your customers to actually use it :-)
I personally think the idea that Apple products just work has been generated by marketing rather than by actual product design. Apple customers have this idea that their products are so much easier to use than the competitor's but in this day and age any consumer-grade piece
of electronics is a no-brainer to use.
Notice that Microsoft's developments regarding ease of use were aimed at domestic markets mostly. DOS and DOS based products were supposed to be the low tier in their software line. For serious users they had UNIX products instead.
I don't think people should have to know how to program in order to use a computer, but it's good to know the basic concepts about what files & directories are, how to run programs, etc.. IMO, knowing how to program vs. using a computer is like having mechanic skills vs. just knowing how to drive a car. You don't have to be a mechanic to drive a car - and I don't think a computer user would necessarily have to know how to write software. But the more you know, more power to you. Computer operating systems these days at least have some kind of scripting language - Linux and Mac OS let you write Bash scripts, at least; Windows has its batch language and now PowerShell (starting a few versions back).
I personally think the idea that Apple products just work has been generated by marketing rather than by actual product design. Apple customers have this idea that their products are so much easier to use than the competitor's but in this day and age any consumer-grade piece
of electronics is a no-brainer to use.
I don't think people should have to know how to program in order to use computer, but it's good to know the basic concepts about what files & directories are, how to run programs, etc.. IMO, knowing how to progra
I personally think the idea that Apple products just work has been generated by marketing rather than by actual product design. Apple customers have this idea that their products are so much easier to use than the competitor's but in this day and age any consumer-grade piece of electronics is a no-brainer to use.
Notice that Microsoft's developments regarding ease of use were aimed at domestic markets mostly. DOS and DOS based products were supposed to be the low tier in their software line. For serious users they had UNIX products instead.
I don't think people should have to know how to program in order
to use computer, but it's good to know the basic concepts about
what files & directories are, how to run programs, etc.. IMO,
knowing how to progra
I think that users don't necessarily need to know how to code, but they need to know that they *can* if they choose to learn. This often encourages people to learn.
And "coding" can be anything from ASM to Excel, as far as I'm concerned. I've seen some people do some AMAZING shit in Excel that I cannot fathom, while I could write circles around them in Python.
As someone who worked in desktop support for many years supporting Windows, Linux and MacOS, I do feel that taking a novice computer user from start to productive is slightly easier on MacOS than the others.
I no longer
own any Macs or Apple products because of my disdain for their inflated prices and walled garden approach to apps.
In all the home computers and (in the past) work computers I've supported, the number of times I've had to rebuild a Mac because of a crash is two. Windows? Why even count them all?
I've heard Microsoft had a UNIX they called Xenix, in the 80s, but I thought Microsoft was fairly anti-*nix for a long time. Recently Microsoft has seemed to become more accepting of Linux and has been providing tools for Linux (they have a Linux version of Visual Studio Code, for instance).
thought Microsoft was fairly anti-*nix for a long time. Recently
Microsoft has seemed to become more accepting of Linux and has been
providing tools for Linux (they have a Linux version of Visual
Studio Code, for instance).
I think thats only because Microsoft is afraid of higher Linux adoption.
As someone who worked in desktop support for many years supporting Windows, Linux and MacOS, I do feel that taking a novice computer user from start to productive is slightly easier on MacOS than the others.
Of course, it al depends on what their colleagues are using -- getting a new user up on MacOS when they are surrounded by Windows users is much harder since they can't easily get advice from the guy sitting next to them.
That said, I despise MacOS due to Apple's general "do it our way or piss off" attitude (that Microsoft seems to have adopted lately). I no longer own any Macs or Apple products because of my disdain for their inflated prices and walled garden approach to apps. Android isn't much better
these days, sadly.
I think that users don't necessarily need to know how to code, but they need to know that they *can* if they choose to learn. This often encourages people to learn.
And "coding" can be anything from ASM to Excel, as far as I'm concerned. I've seen some people do some AMAZING shit in Excel that I cannot
fathom, while I could write circles around them in Python.
I've heard people say that about Windows. But I've rarely had Windows crash that bad. There was one time in the late 90s I think I got a computer virus that was going around that erased my motherboard BIOS, which made it unbootable.. But other than that, I don't remember ever having Windows crash so bad that I had to reinstall everything. And I think Windows has actually gotten more reliable and crash-resilient over the years. I don't know who is having so many problems with Windows.
Nightfox wrote to 2twisty <=-
I think thats only because Microsoft is afraid of higher Linux adoption.
Microsoft supporting Linux because they're afraid of higher Linux adoption..?
Microsoft supporting Linux because they're afraid of higher Linux adoption..?
Standard Microsoft Practice: Embrace, Extend, Usurp.
Remember back to the start of the Netbook craze? The Asus eee PC?
The eee PC wouldn't run the current Windows, so Asus ask Microsoft if they could license Win95 (I think). MS said "No". So Asus initially brought their product to market as Linux only - and it sold REALLY well.
Microsoft then quickly changed their mind and agreed to license the older Widows. But they still charged a hefty fee for that license (compared to the price of the netbook).
So people were avoiding the Windows eee PC because it cost more than the Linux version (it was more than the license fee because of the extra RAM needed to run Windows).
Microsoft again changed their mind on the license fee and dropped it to something reasonable.
They can't have people finding out that Linux is just as easy to use as Windows.
Microsoft supporting Linux because they're afraid of higher Linux
adoption..?
Microsoft: Crap! People are turning to Linux! Let's give them *just enough* linux to keep them from removing Windows so we can still get our tasty telemetry.
I find both Windows and Mac OS limiting, though Windows moreso because I can work some magic with the unix tools.
I remember hearing about the Asus eee PC, but I never used one. I don't remember hearing about it using Linux and selling really well though.. I didn't know that many people had been using Linux on a consumer PC.
The Timesharing system would be more suitable in say a work environment, an academic environment, somewhere where people are working together.
If the systems are workstations, linked, it makes more sense. You can work on the machine and communicate at the same interface. Indeed, this was the original intention. Talk wasn't added to unix just so that
people could use a terminal only to talk, it was for people sharing the computing resources to talk.
But if the access to the terminal, the machine is intended ONLY for communication, the BBS is better.
I've used both, the BBS extensively, but also a shared public Unix. The former, in terms of usability is light years ahead (and in some ways, ahead of even Social Media)_.
Cool. It will be the same username I have here, unless someone else has taken it.
grex.org appears to be down, can't ping or ssh in. I'll keep trying.
And "coding" can be anything from ASM to Excel, as far as I'm concerned. I've
seen some people do some AMAZING shit in Excel that I cannot fathom, while I
could write circles around them in Python.
What kind of coding is there in Excel? Excel is a powerful spreadsheet tool, which
lets you enter complex calculations for it to figure out, but I'm not sure I'd
consider that coding. To me, "coding" means writing code in order to make a comput
program, script, phone app, etc..
Nightfox
Re: Re: SSH on BBSes
By: Andre to 2twisty on Mon Apr 18 2022 04:35 pm
In all the home computers and (in the past) work computers I've supported, the
number of times I've had to rebuild a Mac because of a crash is two. Windows?
even count them all?
I've heard people say that about Windows. But I've rarely had Windows crash that b
There was one time in the late 90s I think I got a computer virus that was going
around that erased my motherboard BIOS, which made it unbootable.. But other than
that, I don't remember ever having Windows crash so bad that I had to reinstall
everything. And I think Windows has actually gotten more reliable and crash-resili
over the years. I don't know who is having so many problems with Windows.
Nightfox
Re: Re: SSH on BBSes
By: 2twisty to Nightfox on Mon Apr 18 2022 08:17 pm
thought Microsoft was fairly anti-*nix for a long time. Recently
Microsoft has seemed to become more accepting of Linux and has been
providing tools for Linux (they have a Linux version of Visual
Studio Code, for instance).
I think thats only because Microsoft is afraid of higher Linux adoption.
Microsoft supporting Linux because they're afraid of higher Linux adoption..?
Nightfox
I didn't have crashes back then, but I had issues with resource consumption and OS degradation with use. To this day I think degradation is one of the biggest issues for a common user since performance goes down with use.
This is something that I like of Linux and the BSDs: once you set a machine up, the filesystems don't frag to self-annihilation and the core OS does not get polluted, since core OS changes are done with package managers or ports engines which allow to keep changes controlled.
Are you referring to Windows Subsystem for Linux?
Arelor wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
The Internet, as infrastructure, is very decentralized itself. It is called The Network of Networks because it is built up by small networks linked together and ran by different administrators. I think it is
quite cool, if you ask me. There are a number of choke points but even those are solvable if need be.
2twisty wrote to Nightfox <=-
I've heard Microsoft had a UNIX they called Xenix, in the 80s, but I thought Microsoft was fairly anti-*nix for a long time. Recently Microsoft has seemed to become more accepting of Linux and has been providing tools for Linux (they have a Linux version of Visual Studio Code, for instance).
I think thats only because Microsoft is afraid of higher Linux
adoption.
boraxman wrote to 2twisty <=-
Using Windows feels like doing a job with one hand tied behind your
back. Whenever I think of some way to solve a problem, to do
something, I usually can't, as the system is locked down and the tools
I have pretty weak.
I find both Windows and Mac OS limiting, though Windows moreso becaus can work some magic with the unix tools.
Which UNIX tools?
The GNU tools are available for Windows:
http://gnuwin32.sourceforge.net
I normally install at least a couple of them on my Windows systems.
grep is probably the one I use the most on Windows by far.
The Timesharing system would be more suitable in say a work environme an academic environment, somewhere where people are working together. If the systems are workstations, linked, it makes more sense. You ca work on the machine and communicate at the same interface. Indeed, t was the original intention. Talk wasn't added to unix just so that people could use a terminal only to talk, it was for people sharing t computing resources to talk.
This is a take I don't really understand. A BBS-style captive user interface can be built on top of a timesharing system, but doing the inverse is much, much harder.
To quote Dennis Ritchie:
"What we wanted to preserve was not just a good environment
in which to do programming, but a system around which a
fellowship could form. We knew from experience that the
essence of communal computing, as supplied by remote-access,
time-shared machines, is not just to type programs into a
terminal instead of a keypunch, but to encourage close
communication."
In other words, time-sharing systems provide a platform for communications.
Workstations, of course, were a reaction against timesharing
systems, and `talk` was for network communications; `write`
predates that significantly.
This seems highly subjective, and moreover, with a suitable
facade over the command line, it'd be indistinguishable.
I've heard people say that about Windows. But I've rarely had Windows that b
There was one time in the late 90s I think I got a computer virus that going
around that erased my motherboard BIOS, which made it unbootable.. But other than
that, I don't remember ever having Windows crash so bad that I had to reinstall
everything. And I think Windows has actually gotten more reliable and crash-resili
over the years. I don't know who is having so many problems with Windo
Nightfox
My main issue nowadays is update management, when it comes to Windows. I removed all
Windows systems from my home life by Windows Vista.
I didn't have crashes back then, but I had issues with resource consumption and OS
degradation with use. To this day I think degradation is one of the biggest issues for
a common user since performance goes down with use.
This is something that I like of Linux and the BSDs: once you set a machine up, the
filesystems don't frag to self-annihilation and the core OS does not get polluted,
since core OS changes are done with package managers or ports engines which allow to
keep changes controlled.
Hmm, I was out of town for a long weekend, but it's up.
Nightfox wrote to Dr. What <=-
I remember hearing about the Asus eee PC, but I never used one. I
don't remember hearing about it using Linux and selling really well though.. I didn't know that many people had been using Linux on a consumer PC.
That said, I despise MacOS due to Apple's general "do it our way or piss off" attitude (that Microsoft seems to have adopted lately). I no longer own any Macs or Apple products because of my disdain for their inflated prices and walled garden approach to apps. Android isn't much better
these days, sadly.
Microsoft has seemed to become more accepting of Linux and has been providing tools for Linux (they have a Linux version of Visual Studio Code, for instance).
That said, I despise MacOS due to Apple's general "do it our way or piss off" attitude (that Microsoft seems to have adopted lately). I longer own any Macs or Apple products because of my disdain for thei inflated prices and walled garden approach to apps. Android isn't mu better
these days, sadly.
Very much agree with this. I support friends and family and I will be moving most people to Arch soon. Most play games so in my experience so that is the easiest system for me to support. I still use ubuntu based systems for my servers but will probably switch to arch at some point. A for Android I really like oneplus they do not come with garbage preinstalled. I don't even have facebook anymore :D
You do have to buy from them directly but the devices are fast stable and much lower cost than their competitors.
DrClaw
Sysop Noverdu BBS (Noverdu.com)
BBS Specs 64 CORE/192G Ram/Dell Server
Not disputing at all you can do this with Unix, though this is in the context of a working environment where people can also collaborate.
Some people when they connect to a system, are not looking to do work,
but purely communicate.
This seems highly subjective, and moreover, with a suitable
facade over the command line, it'd be indistinguishable.
It is subjective, but my opinion is based on having used both, and
finding the BBS system more amenable specifically for chat and messaging and threaded discussions. I haven't seen a counter example. I know someone (you?) provided an example, but I was unable to access it.
I saw a thread on Reddit from someone who had a 21 year old Debian install. He installed it 21 years ago, and just kept updating it to the next version of Debian, and hardware updates. A 21 year old
installation that still ran fine.
Seem to be having the same problem. I've issued the command
ssh newuser@grex.org
but it just times out.
Are you user it is accessible to external IPs?
A traceroute to grex.org doesn't succeed either.
I have considered rolling distributions for home servers, but I loathe
the idea of having to go with multitude of potential API breaking
upgrades within a single year. Some third party projects are kind of
posh and behave very badly of some library or subsystem changes from a minor library version to another.
Microsoft used to see Linux as a competitor when they were in the OS business
, but now that cloud services are their moneymaker, they want
Microsoft 365, Azure, and Visual Studio to run and support all desktop platforms.
Mo platforms = mo customers == mo money.
Re: Re: SSH on BBSes
By: poindexter FORTRAN to 2twisty on Tue Apr 19 2022 06:36 am
Microsoft used to see Linux as a competitor when they were in the OS business
Is Microsoft no longer in the OS business?
They are clearly preparing themselves to replace OS licensing as their main revenue model. It does not mean they will kick it out completely,
but nowadays they are getting heavily into data mining, selling services under subscription models, and becoming LInux vendors themselves.
Tech really has taken a turn for the worse, with the "consumer" model of devices and apps. We have the power to run our own social networks, to handle our own communications, and yet, we centralise it all in the hands of Big Tech.
I was assigned an Mac Air at work, and the only thing about it which I found better than Windows was the terminal and access to unix tools, and python being installed. It wasn't easier to use, MS Office was jankier, and there was little option to configure the appearance.
generated by marketing rather than by actual product design. Apple customers have this idea that their products are so much easier to use than the competitor's but in this day and age any consumer-grade piece
of electronics is a no-brainer to use.
That's true. Several years ago, at work at the job I had at the time, I was working on making some updates to a Mac sample app that our team had at the time. I was using a MacBook for that at work, and I remember Apple's XCode occasionally crashing, and I was also using a Mac scripting program from Apple that would crash even more often. It was a bit frustrating trying to work with tools like that.. Hopefully they've gotten better.
I remember hearing about the Asus eee PC, but I never used one. I don't remember hearing about it using Linux and selling really well though.. I didn't know that many people had been using Linux on a consumer PC.
You can design spreadsheets which are capable of calculating the optimal pipe size for a given steam load. Some of those nearly feel like standalone programs. I don't think those count as coding for somebody
used to C, but I think they count as coding for some random home
user :-)
I remember hearing about the Asus eee PC, but I never used one. I don't remember hearing about it using Linux and selling really well though.. I didn't know that many people had been using Linux on a consumer PC.
The eee PC sold well enough that other manufacturers came out with their own netbooks (many running Linux as well). But the market was short lived. Tablets took over soon after that.
It wasn't a PC that was very useful for anything that needed lots of keyboard input. But it was very good at surfing the Internet, checking mail, and such.
Microsoft has seemed to become more accepting of Linux and has been providing tools for Linux (they have a Linux version of Visual Studio Code, for instance).
Thats because the see the writing on the wall. Now that they are going
to start selling ad space right on your desktop and games are mostly playable in Linux its only a matter of time before they loose the home
PC grip and why not sell you stuff to use on Linux and not maintain the
OS anymore.
You mean like the Well? Or Grex? Or M-Net? Or SDF? Or...? Those
systems were built purely for communications (well, SDF is a bit
more general purpose).
People have used Unix systems for purely "communications" purposes
for decades.
I thought you said you were going to keep trying?
ssh newuser@grex.org and run `menu` once your account is
created.
"This is my favorite hammer. I've replaced the head 5 times and
the handle 10 times."
By that metric, our IBM 6150 that was running 4.3BSD in 1988 is
still running. We've upgraded it, of course, and it's now a VPS
running OpenBSD 7.0 on x86_64, with detours as an i486DX2-66
running FreeBSD and a Sun UltraSPARC running NetBSD.
For that matter, there are installations that ran 7th Edition Unix
on PDP-11's and upgraded over time to running Linux on ARM64.
--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/24 (Linux/64)
I log into it via "external IPs" and don't have a problem.
There are half a dozen people logged in right now. From
SDF right now:
: iceland; telnet grex.org 22
Trying 20.185.61.111...
Connected to grex.org.
Escape character is '^]'.
SSH-2.0-OpenSSH_7.7
^]
telnet> q
Connection closed.
: iceland;
Come to think of it, sdf.org is also an interesting example
of a communications-oriented Unix system. Bboard and com
take a bit getting used to, but are interesting.
I think thats an indictment of the wider user base now, as much as it is the technology. If you make it easier to use you get less able
individuals using it, and the whole thing slides down a slippery slope. The days where it was all computer literate users using these systems is long past.
Nightfox wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
Microsoft used to see Linux as a competitor when they were in the OS business
Is Microsoft no longer in the OS business?
There are still a lot of Windows PCs out there,
and I would imagine
Microsoft is still making a large amount of money from selling copies
of Windows when people upgrade or buy new PCs.
I thought you said you were going to keep trying? ssh
I am trying! I just tried again now, and no luck. ssh
newuser@grex.org doesn't work.
To clarify, by "upgrade", it was not an format/reinstall, or installing a new OS over the old one. It was an actual upgrade, an update of Debian from one version to the next.
They can't have people finding out that Linux is just as
easy to use as Windows.
I remember hearing about the Asus eee PC, but I never used
one. I don't remember hearing about it using Linux and
selling really well though.. I didn't know that many
people had been using Linux on a consumer PC.
Arelor wrote to Nightfox <=-
It is clear they no longer expect selling Windows and MS Office
licenses to be their bread and butter. They are making calculated moves
in order to keep going once these core features start running dry.
Nightfox wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
Re: Re: SSH on BBSes
By: poindexter FORTRAN to 2twisty on Tue Apr 19 2022 06:36 am
Microsoft used to see Linux as a competitor when they were in the OS business
Is Microsoft no longer in the OS business?
Spectre wrote to Nightfox <=-
There was a time, Apple sold a complete package... owning its own hardware, OS and a lot of its own software. But you'd have to go back
to the early 90's for the rest of this to be accurate. At this stage Apple was noted for producing remarkably bug free code and o/s, all the way to about MacOS8 not sure about 9, and OSX was the real start of the rot.
Spectre wrote to Arelor <=-
Used to be a time here... I'm scratching my head trying to remember
what the old MS database was... the dodgy one that'd fall over and eat your data...Access back at about win 95/98 Anyway there were a couple
of guys selling retail/inventory software that was just an access DB...
boraxman wrote to claw <=-
I don't want Microsoft to fail. Sure, Windows is crap, I wouldn't use
it, but having the "average person" move to Linux en masse fills me
with dread. Devs will change Linux and the distros to something that suits Windows users, not Linux users.
It's a smart shift. I can run Microsoft 365 apps on Linux and get the same functionality as the web apps on Windows, with most of the functionality of Office installed on the laptop.
To clarify, by "upgrade", it was not an format/reinstall, or installing new OS over the old one. It was an actual upgrade, an update of Debian from one version to the next.
I reckon you're damned lucky then. I've always had zero joy trying to upgrad any distro. I got so used to stuff breaking at any kind of update, I refuse to make any these days, and if I have to have some kind of upgrade for some specific software I'll start from scratch. Even my current server install i fscked. It won't upgrade, there's stuff thats broken from that last attempt I can't run fail2ban any more...
Spec
*** THE READER V4.50 [freeware]
"This is my favorite hammer. I've replaced the head 5 times and
the handle 10 times."
By that metric, our IBM 6150 that was running 4.3BSD in 1988 is
still running. We've upgraded it, of course, and it's now a VPS running OpenBSD 7.0 on x86_64, with detours as an i486DX2-66
running FreeBSD and a Sun UltraSPARC running NetBSD.
For that matter, there are installations that ran 7th Edition Unix
on PDP-11's and upgraded over time to running Linux on ARM64.
To clarify, by "upgrade", it was not an format/reinstall, or installing
a new OS over the old one. It was an actual upgrade, an update of
Debian from one version to the next.
Sure, most files were replaced, but it is still a testament to stability.
I thought you said you were going to keep trying?
ssh newuser@grex.org and run `menu` once your account is
created.
I am trying!
I just tried again now, and no luck.
ssh newuser@grex.org doesn't work.
grex.org seems inaccessible to me. Cannot ssh, cannot ping.
Ping reports the IP address as 20.185.61.111, but I can't reach that IP address. The domain name resolves OK.
I can telnet in as you described, and get the same response.
But SSH, nothing...
Mac OS 7 and 8 were OK, but they produced Bus Errors like any other OS had their errors, parameter RAM resets were a common fix, and the TCP stack
I'll second that, grex isn't resolving. Scratch that it resolvs but doesn't answer anything.. she's deaf as a post. Is your IP still 20.185.61.111?
Well, the core of their business model used to be OEM deals and volume license agreements, but now it's recurring revenue from Azure and Microsoft 365. They're still making money on the OSes, but not like before.
I remember hearing about the Asus eee PC, but I never used one. I don't remember hearing about it using Linux and selling really well though.. I
tenser wrote to boraxman <=-
I thought you said you were going to keep trying?
ssh newuser@grex.org and run `menu` once your account is
created.
I am trying!
I just tried again now, and no luck.
ssh newuser@grex.org doesn't work.
grex.org seems inaccessible to me. Cannot ssh, cannot ping.
Ping reports the IP address as 20.185.61.111, but I can't reach that IP address. The domain name resolves OK.
I just logged in. The machine is up; last rebooted three
days ago. I'm sorry but I don't know what to tell you; have
you tried logging in from a different IP address? Perhaps
you're on a blacklisted IP block for some reason.
I don't want Microsoft to fail. Sure, Windows is crap, I wouldn't use
it, but having the "average person" move to Linux en masse fills me with dread. Devs will change Linux and the distros to something that suits Windows users, not Linux users.
I don't ever recall seeing a "bus error" though.
Is Microsoft no longer in the OS business?
most out of a Mac. No MS software is a particularly good sample of the good bad or the ugly of Apple, so much as a view of the ugly of MS.
When was the last time you paid for a copy of Windows?
I reckon you're damned lucky then. I've always had zero joy trying to upgrade any distro. I got so used to stuff breaking at any kind of
Isn't resolving (implying a DNS issue) or isn't connecting?
20.185.61.111?
device at the time, if you put it to the right use. It came with linux installed, but I switched from their distro to some community one for reasons I don't recall.
Actually, with the exception of Outlook, LibreOffice and OpenOffice will do 100% of what 99% of the users need.
When was the last time you paid for a copy of Windows?
Well technically I got a sweet deal updating to windows 10 from a copy of 8. I paid $20.
How's Evolution doing? I played with it a while ago on a Linux desktop replacement project for work back in 2015, it looked pretty close to Outlook. --- SBBSecho 3.14-Win32
Is Microsoft no longer in the OS business?
When was the last time you paid for a copy of Windows?
Microsoft is in the DATA MINING business.
In those first years, the Mac file servers would abend with a "Bus Error" dialog box so often, we had a file server called Mr. Bus Error.
Actually, with the exception of Outlook, LibreOffice and OpenOffice will do 100% of what 99% of the users need.
I reckon you're damned lucky then. I've always had zero joy trying to upgrade any distro. I got so used to stuff breaking at any kind of
Me too. That's why I run LTS versions only. If, after the LTS expires I need additional functionality / security, I tend to rebuild with the latest LTS.
I reckon you're damned lucky then. I've always had zero joy trying to upgrade any distro. I got so used to stuff breaking at any kind of update, I refuse to make any these days, and if I have to have some kind of upgrade for some specific software I'll start from scratch. Even my current server install is fscked. It won't upgrade, there's stuff thats broken from that last attempt, I can't run fail2ban any more...
Spec
I don't want Microsoft to fail. Sure, Windows is crap, I wouldn't us it, but having the "average person" move to Linux en masse fills me with dread. Devs will change Linux and the distros to something that suits Windows users, not Linux users.
I don't know if it's crap any more. My desktop PC's been running Windows 10, I've gone through a Feature Upgrade seamlessly, and I haven't seen
a crash in a year. I mostly keep it on 24/7 unless I'm away from my
home office for the day.
WSL gives me a posix environment that blends into the OS nicely, much
more seamlessly than cygwin or gitbash.
While I understand this is the way the world is going. I've never understood how easily people shifted to this model of remote
applications. It makes even less sense to me than storing your data on someone elses HD in a data centre somewhere beyond your control.
I've firmly stuck with Office 2003 its the last one I have a key for. After that I've moved to open office as far as possible.
Spec
To clarify, by "upgrade", it was not an format/reinstall, or installi a new OS over the old one. It was an actual upgrade, an update of Debian from one version to the next.
Sure, most files were replaced, but it is still a testament to stabil
What's the difference? Debian now is a completely different OS
than it was 20 years ago.
We have data files and even configuration files from the 4.3BSD
era on the ROMP machines that have made it to the new system
unchanged.
I just logged in. The machine is up; last rebooted three
days ago. I'm sorry but I don't know what to tell you; have
you tried logging in from a different IP address? Perhaps
you're on a blacklisted IP block for some reason.
What distro are you trying to upgrade?
I'll second that, grex isn't resolving. Scratch that it resolvs but doesn't answer anything.. she's deaf as a post. Is your IP still 20.185.61.111?
If you trace route the IP it ends in the states. Did seem to travel a
bit but ends in the states. Do you have an email for this person? Maybe they are unaware there is an issue.
DrClaw
Sysop Noverdu BBS (Noverdu.com)
BBS Specs 64 CORE/192G Ram/Dell Server
--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/24 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Noverdu BBS (21:1/210)
What distro are you trying to upgrade?
None any more... only use a ubuntu LTS and start again when it can no longer do its job. In the past.. Slackware, Red Hat, Fedora, Mandrake
and even Ubuntu. The worst failure is when an install attempt is made
for whatever piece of software fails, and then you're locked at a point where you cannot remove the failed install and you can't complete it either.
Spec
Is Microsoft no longer in the OS business?
When was the last time you paid for a copy of Windows?
Microsoft is in the DATA MINING business.
What country are you trying to log in from? I've tried from a pubnix as well.
What country are you trying to log in from? I've tried from a pubnix as
To clarify, by "upgrade", it was not an format/reinstall, or ins a new OS over the old one. It was an actual upgrade, an update Debian from one version to the next.
Sure, most files were replaced, but it is still a testament to s
What's the difference? Debian now is a completely different OS
than it was 20 years ago.
We have data files and even configuration files from the 4.3BSD
era on the ROMP machines that have made it to the new system unchanged.
There is a big difference between upgrading, and having continuity of installed apps and configuration ,and installing fresh.
When you install fresh, you have to then install all the programs you had previously, copy config files or reconfigure.
It is different.
I don't know anything more about grex.org than you. A 'whois' shows it
is registered to Cyberspace Communications Inc, but no contact details. It seems it is registered in Missouri.
The issue seems not to be that the destination device isn't there, but that it doesn't respond. I would guess a firewall or access rules.
When was the last time you paid for a copy of Windows?
You pay indirectly when you buy a new OEM computer :-)
Besides, there is
people actually purchasing Windows licenses. I suppose it is the new masochist trend...
But yeah, I agree it is not going to be a reliable business model in the future.
So in those 20 years software has never been upgraded in such a way
you had to modify configuration files? Of course, when you do those upgrades you are, in fact, reinstalling all of those programs.
What country are you trying to log in from? I've tried from a pubnix
Straya...Melbourne to be precise...
There is a big difference between upgrading, and having continuity of installed apps and configuration ,and installing fresh.
So on your 20 year old Debian machine you've never replaced
the storage device?
There is a big difference between upgrading, and having continuity of installed apps and configuration ,and installing fresh.
So on your 20 year old Debian machine you've never replaced
the storage device?
Besides, there is
people actually purchasing Windows licenses. I suppose it is the new masochist trend...
New masochist trend? If you're building your own desktop PC, it helps to bu copy of Windows so that you have a legit copy.
There is a big difference between upgrading, and having continuity installed apps and configuration ,and installing fresh.
So on your 20 year old Debian machine you've never replaced
the storage device?
Actually, when I replace storage devices I just dump the old Operating System on the new storage and it certainly does not feel like a software upgrade.
The joys of performing backups that copy _EVERYTHING_. If something crashes you can just dump the whole backup in a new drive and you are ready to go.
--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken
| Sysop: | CyberNix |
|---|---|
| Location: | London, UK |
| Users: | 22 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 12:42:44 |
| Calls: | 892 |
| Files: | 4,436 |
| Messages: | 669,269 |