Usenet Archive (1981 – 1991)(usenet.trashworldnews.com)
usenet.trashworldnews.com
Usenet Archive (1981 – 1991)
https://usenet.trashworldnews.com/
6 comments
Boy, do I miss usenet news. It was a bright, shining star of the internet. Nothing comparable rose to replace it after Google killed it.
Google was a part of it. But spam, and a lack of proper moderation was really the issue.
A bigger issue was that Google buried all the archives from the Usenet with it.
A bigger issue was that Google buried all the archives from the Usenet with it.
Spam was a constant issue, yes, like it is today. But you did at least have reasonable tools to minimize the impact of it.
> A bigger issue was that Google buried all the archives from the Usenet with it.
Indeed. Killing usenet was bad. Burying the archives was unforgivable.
> A bigger issue was that Google buried all the archives from the Usenet with it.
Indeed. Killing usenet was bad. Burying the archives was unforgivable.
Here's a thread on the birth of Haskell in 1990.[1] Simon Peyton Jones was writing about GHC supporting parallelization, and the team lacking access to hardware that supports shared memory for testing:
Good news: we are; we have a parallel implementation running on the
GRIP multiprocessor, with absolute wall-clock speedup over the same
programs running on a comparable uniprocessor (never to be taken
for granted!). This has only recently sprung to life, so it will be
a while before we can report proper results.
Bad news: it only runs on GRIP at present, so that rather limits its
distribution. We have access to a Meiko transputer machine, but it
is quite a lot harder to deal with a distributed memory architecture. The
compiler would port rather easily to a shared-memory multiprocessor,
but we don't have access to one at present.
Clicking through at random and found this post asking for support for protesters in "Tian-An-Men Square": https://usenet.trashworldnews.com/?thread=789653
Not sure what this is supposed to be, since it's a tiny fraction of the Usenet messages posted during that decade (less than 1%?). But it was nice at a quick glance to see some names I hadn't seen in 30 years.