Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Steven Shelikoff wrote:
You must use an isp to read a usenet newsgroup. Well, you have to have *some* sort of Internet connection, at least intermittently. If you have an Internet connection, you're getting it from some service provider. That provider may or may not be a commercial ISP, but they are an ISP of some sort. Shawn |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 21:42:53 -0600, Shawn Willden
wrote: Steven Shelikoff wrote: You must use an isp to read a usenet newsgroup. Well, you have to have *some* sort of Internet connection, at least intermittently. If you have an Internet connection, you're getting it from some service provider. That provider may or may not be a commercial ISP, but they are an ISP of some sort. You're making the same mistake he made. No, you don't need an internet connection of any type to read usenet newsgroups. You can get a newsfeed without an ISP. The usenet has been around much longer than the commercial internet as we know it today and for the most part used UUCP to transfer messages. And you can still use that method without having any internet access at all. Of course, when this was all pointed out to Jax and he just huffed and denied it, as is his usual MO when someone points out a mistake of his, when the much easier and saner thing to do is to just admit a mistake and move on. No one's perfect... but Jox thinks he is even though he's wrong in just about everything he says. Steve |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"steve", ARPANET is long since gone.
Steven Shelikoff wrote: You must use an isp to read a usenet newsgroup. Well, you have to have *some* sort of Internet connection, at least intermittently. If you have an Internet connection, you're getting it from some service provider. That provider may or may not be a commercial ISP, but they are an ISP of some sort. You're making the same mistake he made. No, you don't need an internet connection of any type to read usenet newsgroups. You can get a newsfeed without an ISP. The usenet has been around much longer than the commercial internet as we know it today and for the most part used UUCP to transfer messages. And you can still use that method without having any internet access at all. Of course, when this was all pointed out to Jax and he just huffed and denied it, as is his usual MO when someone points out a mistake of his, when the much easier and saner thing to do is to just admit a mistake and move on. No one's perfect... but Jox thinks he is even though he's wrong in just about everything he says. Steve |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
JAXAshby wrote:
"steve", ARPANET is long since gone. That's arguably true, but irrelevant. ARPANET and UUCPNET were completely different networks. ARPANET came long before UUCPNET but was significantly more advanced. ARPANET was an inter-network from the very beginning, using packet switching and automated routing, whereas UUCPNET was a point-to-point network with multi-hop routing being done manually (with bang paths). The underlying communications were different as well: UUCPNET was primarily a loose collection of computers tied together with dialup whereas ARPANET was on leased lines, from the very beginning. Protocols were also different: ARPANET originally used NCP and then switched to TCP/IP in the early 80s. UUCPNET used the UUCP protocol (it's actually more accurate to say that the collection of computers using UUCP was called UUCPNET). Eventually, UUCPNET merged into ARPANET/NSFNet/Internet by transporting UUCP data streams in TCP, but that was a fairly quick-n-dirty way to combine the networks, and UUCP was pretty much phased out. It's still occasionally used for transferring files, by people who don't care about security or performance. Basically, UUCPNET was a poor solution (though one remembered with fondness), and was quickly replaced by the TCP/IP-based ARPANET, which eventually grew into what we now call the Internet. The morphing of ARPANET into Internet was less a technological change and more of an administration and funding change, so people can and do disagree about whether or not ARPANET really is gone, or if it's just been renamed. Shawn. |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
dude, I sold services for ARPANET back in the days when only universities and
defense contractor's cared. JAXAshby wrote: "steve", ARPANET is long since gone. That's arguably true, but irrelevant. ARPANET and UUCPNET were completely different networks. ARPANET came long before UUCPNET but was significantly more advanced. ARPANET was an inter-network from the very beginning, using packet switching and automated routing, whereas UUCPNET was a point-to-point network with multi-hop routing being done manually (with bang paths). The underlying communications were different as well: UUCPNET was primarily a loose collection of computers tied together with dialup whereas ARPANET was on leased lines, from the very beginning. Protocols were also different: ARPANET originally used NCP and then switched to TCP/IP in the early 80s. UUCPNET used the UUCP protocol (it's actually more accurate to say that the collection of computers using UUCP was called UUCPNET). Eventually, UUCPNET merged into ARPANET/NSFNet/Internet by transporting UUCP data streams in TCP, but that was a fairly quick-n-dirty way to combine the networks, and UUCP was pretty much phased out. It's still occasionally used for transferring files, by people who don't care about security or performance. Basically, UUCPNET was a poor solution (though one remembered with fondness), and was quickly replaced by the TCP/IP-based ARPANET, which eventually grew into what we now call the Internet. The morphing of ARPANET into Internet was less a technological change and more of an administration and funding change, so people can and do disagree about whether or not ARPANET really is gone, or if it's just been renamed. Shawn. |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
JAXAshby wrote:
dude, I sold services for ARPANET back in the days when only universities and defense contractor's cared. Then how could you possibly confuse UUCPNET with ARPANET? Shawn. |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"steve", you have been over served. go sleep it off.
"steve", ARPANET is long since gone. Another non-sequitor and stupid statement by you. Usenet did not depend on arpanet either. You could read and post to usenet newgroups without an arpanet or what it has become (internet) connection, and still can. Steve Steven Shelikoff wrote: You must use an isp to read a usenet newsgroup. Well, you have to have *some* sort of Internet connection, at least intermittently. If you have an Internet connection, you're getting it from some service provider. That provider may or may not be a commercial ISP, but they are an ISP of some sort. You're making the same mistake he made. No, you don't need an internet connection of any type to read usenet newsgroups. You can get a newsfeed without an ISP. The usenet has been around much longer than the commercial internet as we know it today and for the most part used UUCP to transfer messages. And you can still use that method without having any internet access at all. Of course, when this was all pointed out to Jax and he just huffed and denied it, as is his usual MO when someone points out a mistake of his, when the much easier and saner thing to do is to just admit a mistake and move on. No one's perfect... but Jox thinks he is even though he's wrong in just about everything he says. Steve |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
UK red diesel costs. | General | |||
Why I don't Buy Boating/Fishing Gear at Wal-Mart | General | |||
Why Ficht failed no1 | General | |||
Habbi's gearcase full of water | General | |||
Evinrude FICHT beats out Yamaha in JD Powers survey | General |