Alphonse Q Muthafuyer wrote:
On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 13:41:25 -0700, "nospam" wrote:

http://www.comcast.net/newsgroups/

It's been fun y'all.

Damned if I'd be the least inclined to let the likes of
Comcast bugger my usenet access.

I know some folks have few (if any) alternatives, but ...
the real solution to such problem is to DROP COMCAST
(like a hot potato).

What would happen if Comcast lost, say, 1kk customers?

Note that ATT has dropped only the binaries (all that's
required by "The Powers That Be").


Quotes are in the wrong place, IMHO. Should be around 'required'. Like
the previous 100 threads on this topic here and elsewhere said, ATT, and
many of the others, seized on the kiddie porn crisis du jour out of NY,
as an excuse to do something they wanted to do anyway, to lower their
overhead. CYA against future legal exposure was just a side bennie.
Looks like Comcast is just the latest biggie to take the next logical
(to a beancounter) step of stopping news entirely. All those storage
arrays and power to run them, especially for binaries, cost a whole
lotta money. And since only a small percentage of the paying customers
are even aware of them or use them, well, it looks a whole like like a
salad bar in a fast food joint, once the fad died down.

I'll note that many or most government/corporate sites stopped hosting
or passing on news, years ago, once they transitioned from UNIX to NT
servers, and GIU desktops, since web sites better fufilled their
internal requirements. Been a long time since the bandwidth usage for
Usenet was 'lost in the weeds', and a sysadmin could sneak it past
corporate.

I understand it, but that doesn't mean I gotta like it.

--
aem sends....