If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
What's a free proxy for the specific purpose of free Usenetposts?
On 2019-02-20, Barry Margolin wrote:
In article , Jasen Betts wrote: On 2019-02-19, arlen holder wrote: They think it's me confused, but all I did was ask this simple question: Q: Does a free proxy even exist to post using free nntp news servers? A: Name just one. They think it's me confused, but all I did was ask this simple question: Q: Does a free proxy even exist to post using free nntp news servers? yes, if you keep repeating the same question you will keep getting the same answer. for example leafnode is free, and inn is free. leafonode is a proxy and inn is a server. If you're going to bother responding to him, stop being deliberately obtuse. He's not looking for proxy software, he's looking for a proxy service. He explained his goal, so the ambiguity in the language has been resolved and you just look like an a-hole giving the same answer over and over. What is is is that he got shown to be wrong in some other newsgroup so he comes here trying to demand a certain answer to a badly-worded question, so that he can then cite some "expert" answer. I guess there is a possibility that he writes things without thinking, although he does claim to think carefully, some of his arguments are truly a site to behold. If he was actually looking for a proxy service he would actually be asking for a proxy service by now. Thers's a possibility that he's finding it hard to maintain a server to post through due to reputation, and wants to find a new way to post without changing the way he posts (if you catch my drift). He's not the worst troll on the internet, and he is more entertaining than most. -- When I tried casting out nines I made a hash of it. |
Ads |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
What's a free proxy for the specific purpose of free Usenet posts?
Barry Margolin wrote:
In article , Jasen Betts wrote: On 2019-02-19, arlen holder wrote: They think it's me confused, but all I did was ask this simple question: Q: Does a free proxy even exist to post using free nntp news servers? A: Name just one. They think it's me confused, but all I did was ask this simple question: Q: Does a free proxy even exist to post using free nntp news servers? yes, if you keep repeating the same question you will keep getting the same answer. for example leafnode is free, and inn is free. leafonode is a proxy and inn is a server. If you're going to bother responding to him, stop being deliberately obtuse. He's not looking for proxy software, he's looking for a proxy service. He explained his goal, so the ambiguity in the language has been resolved and you just look like an a-hole giving the same answer over and over. Easy does it! Don't blame the respondents, blame the culprit/OP. Your wording towards Jasen is uncalled for. Yes, he's looking for a service. No. it's not at all clear that he's looking for a *proxy* service. *He* *thinks* he's looking for a proxy service, because he misunderstood an article which Mike Easter had pointed to. His use of the term 'proxy' especially in (non-)connection with "free nntp news servers" is only muddling the waters. I*M*O, but I might be wrong as well, because arlen is clear as mud and only spewing ******** and insults instead of information/clarification, he's looking for an anonymizer service, specifically one which conceals his IP address. Calling this a proxy service is, again IMO, incorrect/ uninformed terminology. All-in-all, I think Mike described it very well in this post of today: or http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?STYPE=msgid&A=0&MSGI=%3Cgd3ac3Feue6U1@mi d.individual.net%3E |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
What's a free proxy for the specific purpose of free Usenetposts?
Frank Slootweg wrote:
he's looking for an anonymizer service, specifically one which conceals his IP address. Calling this a proxy service is, again IMO, incorrect/ uninformed terminology. Now I'm thinking that his 'problem' is that he wants to use mixmin because it is a text nntp provider which doesn't require authentication; but that mixmin, unlike eternal-september or news.individual.net or others which have a 'complex' x-trace or NPH or other string which contains some derivative of the connecting IP 'smushed' with other variable information such as unix time, mixmin's info is /simply/ some kind of hash of the connecting IP. That makes mixmin's info much much more crackable by header readers than say NIN or e-s. arlen tends to make himself more of a target to usenet header readers who become his adversaries because he so frequently shifts into an abusive rude dialog with ad hominem slurs toward those who have some different view than his own. Using a VPN as a method of concealing his own IP connectivity is one strategy for solving his dilemma, but I don't think it is an ideal one. Open nntp/s not requiring authentication have their own problems in managing their servers which are different from those server admins which require authentication, and providing services to those who 'beat'/defeat the nntp admin's methods isn't exactly 'fair play'. mixmin provides mail2news as one avenue of an anonymized posting and helps users with anonymizing with mixmaster and bananasplit advice, so maybe the mixmin's admin is in agreement with arlen's use of VPN or other strategies to conceal his IP to mitigate mixmin's 'weakness' in obfuscating the connecting IP from prying eyes which would decrypt or 'dehash' the mixmin info line. -- Mike Easter |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
What's a free proxy for the specific purpose of free Usenetposts?
On 20/02/2019 16.52, Barry Margolin wrote:
In article , "Carlos E.R." wrote: On 19/02/2019 18.21, Barry Margolin wrote: In article , Ken Hart wrote: On 2/17/19 6:15 PM, arlen holder wrote: On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 14:29:54 -0800, Mike Easter wrote: I have no interest in that question and I'm under no obligation to even consider it worth discussing. The question is actually very simple & rather easy to comprehend Mike. Knowledgeable users who know the answer can add to our knowledge. Q: What's a free proxy for the specific purpose of free Usenet posts? Google is your friend. I copied and pasted your question into Google; it came back with "About 481,000 results (0.78 seconds)" The seventh result down the page was "25 Best Free Web Proxies for Safer and Anonymous Surfing | SpyAdvice https://spyadvice.com/free-web-proxies/" While I didn't check out the cite/site, it does mention "It also supports Usenet... posting..." Since you can post to Usenet through the Google Groups website, any web proxy does that. That doesn't make it an NNTP proxy. I assume that Google Groups demands a proper google identity. For posting, I assume you're correct. Most NNTP servers require a login, too. There are a few exceptions, like AIOE. Yes, certainly, but in the case of google they have to go with their real mail address visible, while many of us in usenet do not. -- Cheers, Carlos. |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
What's a free proxy for the specific purpose of free Usenet posts?
In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote: Since you can post to Usenet through the Google Groups website, any web proxy does that. That doesn't make it an NNTP proxy. I assume that Google Groups demands a proper google identity. For posting, I assume you're correct. Most NNTP servers require a login, too. There are a few exceptions, like AIOE. Yes, certainly, but in the case of google they have to go with their real mail address visible, while many of us in usenet do not. nope, because usually, it's a fake email. |
#96
|
|||
|
|||
What's a free proxy for the specific purpose of free Usenetposts?
On 20/02/2019 22:17, nospam wrote:
In article , Carlos E.R. wrote: Since you can post to Usenet through the Google Groups website, any web proxy does that. That doesn't make it an NNTP proxy. I assume that Google Groups demands a proper google identity. For posting, I assume you're correct. Most NNTP servers require a login, too. There are a few exceptions, like AIOE. Yes, certainly, but in the case of google they have to go with their real mail address visible, while many of us in usenet do not. nope, because usually, it's a fake email. If email 'works', how can it be "fake" email? -- David B. Devon, UK |
#97
|
|||
|
|||
What's a free proxy for the specific purpose of free Usenetposts?
David in Devon wrote:
nospam wrote: Carlos E.R. wrote: Since you can post to Usenet through the Google Groups website, any web proxy does that. That doesn't make it an NNTP proxy. I assume that Google Groups demands a proper google identity. For posting, I assume you're correct. Most NNTP servers require a login, too. There are a few exceptions, like AIOE. Yes, certainly, but in the case of google they have to go with their real mail address visible, while many of us in usenet do not. nope, because usually, it's a fake email. If email 'works', how can it be "fake" email? The above cited terms are 'ambiguous' he proper google identity google ... real mail address fake email In the case of free email addresses such as gmail's, each gmail address is 'real' in the sense that it functions as an email address and is associated with a gmail account. As opposed to some truly 'bogus' email address which is constructed 'out of whole cloth' to populate such as a From which From might be a social engineering construct of a spam or scam or phish to appear to the uninformed mail reader as if it were from a girl or a bank or whatever, which it is not. In order to post to GG, the user must have (and use) a google account. Whether that google account bears any resemblance to one's true 'identity' is NOT necessary. Maybe a term like 'artificial' (real) account would be better. Such an artificial (artificially created) account functions just like a real account corresponding to one's 'real life' name or identity. Another nntp provider besides aioe which doesn't require login/authentication/ registration/ is mixmin, arlen's nntp. -- Mike Easter |
#98
|
|||
|
|||
What's a free proxy for the specific purpose of free Usenetposts?
On 20/02/2019 23:38, Mike Easter wrote:
David in Devon wrote: nospam wrote: Carlos E.R. wrote: Since you can post to Usenet through the Google Groups website, any web proxy does that. That doesn't make it an NNTP proxy. I assume that Google Groups demands a proper google identity. For posting, I assume you're correct. Most NNTP servers require a login, too. There are a few exceptions, like AIOE. Yes, certainly, but in the case of google they have to go with their real mail address visible, while many of us in usenet do not. nope, because usually, it's a fake email. If email 'works', how can it be "fake" email? The above cited terms are 'ambiguous' he proper google identity google ... real mail address fake email In the case of free email addresses such as gmail's, each gmail address is 'real' in the sense that it functions as an email address and is associated with a gmail account. As opposed to some truly 'bogus' email address which is constructed 'out of whole cloth' to populate such as a From which From might be a social engineering construct of a spam or scam or phish to appear to the uninformed mail reader as if it were from a girl or a bank or whatever, which it is not. In order to post to GG, the user must have (and use) a google account. Whether that google account bears any resemblance to one's true 'identity' is NOT necessary. Maybe a term like 'artificial' (real) account would be better. Such an artificial (artificially created) account functions just like a real account corresponding to one's 'real life' name or identity. Another nntp provider besides aioe which doesn't require login/authentication/ registration/ is mixmin, arlen's nntp. Thank you for clarifying, Mike. There's a great deal which 'nospam' could learn from you, even though he pretends to be an Apple App 'Developer' (but she refuses to disclose WHICH Apps they are. How honest is that, eh?!!!) -- David B. Devon, UK |
#99
|
|||
|
|||
What's a free proxy for the specific purpose of free Usenetposts?
David in Devon wrote:
There's a great deal which 'nospam' could learn from you, even though he pretends to be an Apple App 'Developer' (but she refuses to disclose WHICH Apps they are. How honest is that, eh?!!!) I haven't seen anything 'inaccurate' from nospam in my brief time viewing hir msgs; just generally terse and sometimes of a 'terse opinion', as opposed to an some other opinion with more verbiage to support itself. 'Too terse' might be better than 'too verbose' -- or sometimes not. (For some reason) I'm reminded of the great exchange in Amadeus when the emperor and Mozart had an exchange: Emperor Joseph II: My dear young man, don't take it too hard. Your work is ingenious. It's quality work. And there are simply too many notes, that's all. Just cut a few and it will be perfect. Mozart: Which few did you have in mind, Majesty? -- Mike Easter |
#100
|
|||
|
|||
What's a free proxy for the specific purpose of free Usenetposts?
On 21/02/2019 00.38, Mike Easter wrote:
David in Devon wrote: nospam wrote: Carlos E.R. wrote: Since you can post to Usenet through the Google Groups website, any web proxy does that. That doesn't make it an NNTP proxy. I assume that Google Groups demands a proper google identity. For posting, I assume you're correct. Most NNTP servers require a login, too. There are a few exceptions, like AIOE. Yes, certainly, but in the case of google they have to go with their real mail address visible, while many of us in usenet do not. nope, because usually, it's a fake email. If email 'works', how can it be "fake" email? The above cited terms are 'ambiguous' he proper google identity google ... real mail address fake email In the case of free email addresses such as gmail's, each gmail address is 'real' in the sense that it functions as an email address and is associated with a gmail account. The point I make is that those people that are posting to usenet through Google Groups web service have to use a valid and identified Gmail (aka Google) account, and thus they are using their correct and working email address in the From header, so they are not anonymous. Thus a proxy that uses Google Groups website is not an anonymizer. -- Cheers, Carlos. |
#101
|
|||
|
|||
What's a free proxy for the specific purpose of free Usenetposts?
Mike Easter wrote:
(For some reason) I'm reminded of the great exchange in Amadeus when the emperor and Mozart had an exchange: Emperor Joseph II: My dear young man, don't take it too hard. Your work is ingenious. It's quality work. And there are simply too many notes, that's all. Just cut a few and it will be perfect. Mozart: Which few did you have in mind, Majesty? Or was it this one: The emperor: ''Too beautiful for our ears, my dear Mozart, and monstrous many notes.'' Mozart: ''Exactly as many as are necessary, Your Majesty.'' -- Mike Easter |
#102
|
|||
|
|||
What's a free proxy for the specific purpose of free Usenetposts?
Carlos E.R. wrote:
Mike Easter wrote: The above cited terms are 'ambiguous' he proper google identity google ... real mail address fake email In the case of free email addresses such as gmail's, each gmail address is 'real' in the sense that it functions as an email address and is associated with a gmail account. The point I make is that those people that are posting to usenet through Google Groups web service have to use a valid and identified Gmail (aka Google) account, and thus they are using their correct and working email address in the From header, so they are not anonymous. Thus a proxy that uses Google Groups website is not an anonymizer. A couple of the (MANY) problems with using GG to read and post to usenet a - GG trivially obfuscates the gmail address and only in GG, not in usenet nntp, making the From gmail address harvestable by xover bots or others - variably historically, GG posts the nntp-posting-host in the clear, generally providing the connectivity IP of the poster So, those people who feel that they 'must' use GG because they haven't figured out some other way to access by nntp from a particular location or connectivity situation, find themselves needing to access GG some other way than directly, such as a web proxy. -- Mike Easter |
#103
|
|||
|
|||
What's a free proxy for the specific purpose of free Usenetposts?
On 2/20/2019 5:29 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
those people that are posting to usenet through Google Groups web service have to use a valid and identified Gmail (aka Google) account, and thus they are using their correct and working email address in the From header, so they are not anonymous. Google Groupies can use a throwaway Google email address. (I won't use the word 'fake' so that I won't upset the word usage cops here.) Google throwaways are easy to get, I have several. And they're reasonably anonymous for most uses. Thus a proxy that uses Google Groups website is not an anonymizer. I also use a throwaway Google address and fake name for logging into the Usenet servers that require it. Then I use a different name and address in the newsreader. So now you know my secret: My real name isn't 123456789... It's probably not CIA proof but for Usenet it's reasonably anonymous. |
#104
|
|||
|
|||
What's a free proxy for the specific purpose of free Usenetposts?
On 21/02/2019 02:36, 123456789 wrote:
My real name isn't 123456789... So why are you using your prison number here? It is easy to find your real name when your prison number is known. -- With over 950 million devices now running Windows 10, customer satisfaction is higher than any previous version of windows. |
#105
|
|||
|
|||
What's a free proxy for the specific purpose of free Usenetposts?
On 21/02/2019 00:23, Mike Easter wrote:
David in Devon wrote: There's a great deal which 'nospam' could learn from you, even though he pretends to be an Apple App 'Developer' (but she refuses to disclose WHICH Apps they are. How honest is that, eh?!!!) I haven't seen anything 'inaccurate' from nospam in my brief time viewing hir msgs; just generally terse and sometimes of a 'terse opinion', as opposed to an some other opinion with more verbiage to support itself. 'Too terse' might be better than 'too verbose' -- or sometimes not. Try reading "hir"'s messages in 'rec.photo.digital' Knowledge is good but attitude poor. (For some reason) I'm reminded of the great exchange in Amadeus when the emperor and Mozart had an exchange: Emperor Joseph II: My dear young man, don't take it too hard. Your work is ingenious. It's quality work. And there are simply too many notes, that's all. Just cut a few and it will be perfect. Mozart: Which few did you have in mind, Majesty? Ha! :-D -- David B. Devon, UK |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|