Re: sci.crypt replacement?

[Jeffrey Walton <noloader () gmail com>]

On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 12:52 PM, Paul M. Moriarty <pmm () igtc com> wrote:
> Usenet?  How quaint.
I'm still resisting blogs, tweets, tiny urls, and cell phone text
messages. There's just something about being able to find a usenet
post after years.

Twits and the like are at the mercy of webmasters - here today, gone
tomorrow (or maybe just moved but not re-indexed).

> On Sep 6, 2010, at 8:48 AM, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > What's the deal with searching for sci.crypt usenet group?
> >
> > I used a popular text based search engine to locate the group using
> > the search "sci.crypt". The results were:
> > * sci.crypt.random-numbers
> > * sci.crypt.research
> > * 4 more
> >
> > Upon expanding "4 more", the next result was:
> > Science and Cryptography   science-and-cryptography () googlegroups com
> > To be a suitable replacement for sci.crypt.
> > 12 members
> >
> > 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?
> >
> > 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.

_______________________________________________
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.