Re: sci.crypt replacement?

[Jeffrey Walton <noloader () gmail com>]

On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 12:12 PM,  <Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu> wrote:
> On Mon, 06 Sep 2010 11:48:18 EDT, Jeffrey Walton said:
>
> > The *last* result was the group sci.crypt.
> >
> > Why in the world would anyone want to use a 12-member "suitable
> > replacement" named "Science and Cryptography" when a group with deep
> > usenet tradition exists? Is this more SEO bullshit? Or just search
> > provider bullshit?
>
> There's a lot of Google Groups with delusions of grandeur.  For instance, one
> famous troll claims to have the biggest most influential security group around.
"Internet Bridge Troll" comes to mind
(http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1926079). "Steve Jobs owns a PC" is
hilarious.

> It's possible that the search engine is merely heavily biased towards http://
> resources as opposed to news:// references, and if sci.crypt is archived in a
> lot of places, no single reference was heavily referenced enough to pop to the
> top of the list.
I really miss a quality news feeds from a university. When I went
looking for a replacement (for example, Forte's Agent Premium
Newgroups), I was told the only guarantee was a 30 day retention.

Jeff

_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.