In article
<smcelroy2-EC9AFC.07550617062008@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
MiNe 109 <smcelroy2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> In article <4857495a$0$7032$4c368faf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> "oldhickory" <inboxie@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > I don't hit the home page often but had to empty a mailbox, and saw
this:
> >
> > As of June 23, 2008, Road Runner will no longer offer Newsgroups,
however
> > users can subscribe on their own to third party News providers.
> > Why is Road Runner discontinuing their own Newsgroups service?
> > Due to low subscriber usage Road Runner has decided to discontinue
> > Newsgroups service as of June 23, 2008.
>
> That may be true. This may be a coincidence:
>
> http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9964895-38.html
>
> --
>
> New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo announced on Tuesday that Verizon
> Communications, Time Warner Cable, and Sprint would "shut down major
> sources of online child ****ography."
>
> What Cuomo didn't say is that his agreement with broadband providers
> means that they will broadly curb customers' access to Usenet--the
> venerable pre-Web home of some 100,000 discussion groups, only a handful
> of which contain illegal material.
>
> Time Warner Cable said it will cease to offer customers access to any
> Usenet newsgroups, a decision that will affect customers nationwide.
>
Why don't they just set up filters? It's not difficult. I sub to two
binary groups that are unrelated to **** (one for gardening and one for
food) and I still have no clu' why those s*** sucking sleazebags
crosspost child **** to non-**** newsgroups, but ever since I set up
some carefully worded subject filters, I've not seen any now for a few
years.
Keyword filters work and if they did it right, it'd not filter many of
the legit posts.
If they are that concerned about child ****, why not just quit carrying
binary groups instead of cutting usenet altogether?
--
Peace! Om
"Human nature seems to be to control other people
until they put their foot down." -- Stephan Rothstein
|
