Usenapp phones home

[J. J. Lodder]

Last week my Little Snitch became active by accident.
To my surprise I saw that the Usenapp application phones home
to a server at xeroxsoft.com at every launch of the app,
and again to a different server also at xeroxsoft while the app runs.

This is to me completely unacceptable behaviour in a usenet client.
It should connect to the newsserver adresses I give it,
and to nowhere else.
So I have stopped using and testing Usenapp.

Xorox says this is done merely to validate the license,
but there is no way the user can see
what information Xorox actually collects from Usenapp users.
(or what may be collected in future versions of the app)

Also, the fact that Xoroxsoft has been secretly tracking
its alpha/beta testers has completely destroyed
my confidence in their nice words about privacy.

For the rest, each for himself in tolerance of privacy violations,
but I do advise Usenapp users to turn Little Snitch or similar on
to see for themselves what is happening,

Jan

[Alan B]

Post by J. J. Lodder
Last week my Little Snitch became active by accident.
To my surprise I saw that the Usenapp application phones home
to a server at xeroxsoft.com at every launch of the app,
and again to a different server also at xeroxsoft while the app runs.
This is to me completely unacceptable behaviour in a usenet client.
It should connect to the newsserver adresses I give it,
and to nowhere else.
So I have stopped using and testing Usenapp.
Xorox says this is done merely to validate the license,
but there is no way the user can see
what information Xorox actually collects from Usenapp users.
(or what may be collected in future versions of the app)
Also, the fact that Xoroxsoft has been secretly tracking
its alpha/beta testers has completely destroyed
my confidence in their nice words about privacy.
For the rest, each for himself in tolerance of privacy violations,
but I do advise Usenapp users to turn Little Snitch or similar on
to see for themselves what is happening,

Maybe it’s checking for a newer version. I’m sure Andre will explain what
is happening.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by J. J. Lodder
Last week my Little Snitch became active by accident.
To my surprise I saw that the Usenapp application phones home
to a server at xeroxsoft.com at every launch of the app,
and again to a different server also at xeroxsoft while the app runs.
This is to me completely unacceptable behaviour in a usenet client.
It should connect to the newsserver adresses I give it,
and to nowhere else.
So I have stopped using and testing Usenapp.
Xorox says this is done merely to validate the license,
but there is no way the user can see
what information Xorox actually collects from Usenapp users.
(or what may be collected in future versions of the app)
Also, the fact that Xoroxsoft has been secretly tracking
its alpha/beta testers has completely destroyed
my confidence in their nice words about privacy.
For the rest, each for himself in tolerance of privacy violations,
but I do advise Usenapp users to turn Little Snitch or similar on
to see for themselves what is happening,

Maybe it's checking for a newer version.

That too, and that too should be under user control
by means of a checkbox somewhere.
(check for new versions on launch yes/no)

I'm sure Andre will explain what is happening.

My point is that it should not be happening at all,
no matter what the idea is.
Once you open a channel, behind the user's back,
everything is possible, up to complete logging.

It doesn't matter that the developpers say that nothing
is happening, really.
The point is that all kinds of abuses become possible.

Usenet clients should -never- phone home,
and certainly not in secret,

Jan

PS Yes, I know that users have become used
to privacy having become nearly non-exisent,
on Facebook or Google for example.
But this is good old usenet, and those kind of abuses
shouldn't be introduced into it.

[jeremy]

In article <***@de-ster.xs4all.nl>, ***@de-
ster.demon.nl says...

Post by J. J. Lodder
Usenet clients should -never- phone home,
and certainly not in secret,

Interesting perspective - what's special about usenet in this regard? It
is, to all intents and purposes, just a database and the client is
interacting with it / you.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by jeremy
ster.demon.nl says...

Post by J. J. Lodder
Usenet clients should -never- phone home,
and certainly not in secret,

Interesting perspective - what's special about usenet in this regard? It
is, to all intents and purposes, just a database and the client is
interacting with it / you.

Usenet is a relic from the stone age of the internet.
It is communication between you and me that is as direct as email.
It is no more than a natural development from the mailing lists of yore.

I communicate with my server, who passes it on to your server,
who passes it on to you.
No Facebooks, Googles, no sidelines of any kind
for collecting data about you along the way.

I think it should remain that way,

Jan

[nospam]

Post by J. J. Lodder
Usenet is a relic from the stone age of the internet.
It is communication between you and me that is as direct as email.
It is no more than a natural development from the mailing lists of yore.
I communicate with my server, who passes it on to your server,
who passes it on to you.
No Facebooks, Googles, no sidelines of any kind
for collecting data about you along the way.
I think it should remain that way,

use a usenet client from the stone age, such as rn, trn, slrn or tin.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
Usenet is a relic from the stone age of the internet.
It is communication between you and me that is as direct as email.
It is no more than a natural development from the mailing lists of yore.
I communicate with my server, who passes it on to your server,
who passes it on to you.
No Facebooks, Googles, no sidelines of any kind
for collecting data about you along the way.
I think it should remain that way,

use a usenet client from the stone age, such as rn, trn, slrn or tin.

Why? Any usenet client up to Usenapp will do, afaik,

Jan

[nospam]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
Usenet is a relic from the stone age of the internet.
It is communication between you and me that is as direct as email.
It is no more than a natural development from the mailing lists of yore.
I communicate with my server, who passes it on to your server,
who passes it on to you.
No Facebooks, Googles, no sidelines of any kind
for collecting data about you along the way.
I think it should remain that way,

use a usenet client from the stone age, such as rn, trn, slrn or tin.

Why? Any usenet client up to Usenapp will do, afaik,

because they don't phone home and were written in the true spirit of
usenet, when it was only plain ascii text.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
Usenet is a relic from the stone age of the internet.
It is communication between you and me that is as direct as email.
It is no more than a natural development from the mailing lists of yore.
I communicate with my server, who passes it on to your server,
who passes it on to you.
No Facebooks, Googles, no sidelines of any kind
for collecting data about you along the way.
I think it should remain that way,

use a usenet client from the stone age, such as rn, trn, slrn or tin.

Why? Any usenet client up to Usenapp will do, afaik,

because they don't phone home and were written in the true spirit of
usenet, when it was only plain ascii text.

As it still is. See your own posting above for example,
(and posted with an obsolete newsclient too)

Jan

[nospam]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
Usenet is a relic from the stone age of the internet.
It is communication between you and me that is as direct as email.
It is no more than a natural development from the mailing lists of yore.
I communicate with my server, who passes it on to your server,
who passes it on to you.
No Facebooks, Googles, no sidelines of any kind
for collecting data about you along the way.
I think it should remain that way,

use a usenet client from the stone age, such as rn, trn, slrn or tin.

Why? Any usenet client up to Usenapp will do, afaik,

because they don't phone home and were written in the true spirit of
usenet, when it was only plain ascii text.

As it still is. See your own posting above for example,

no they aren't.

current usenet clients directly support binaries, choice of fonts and
all sorts of stuff cli clients would never even consider.

Post by J. J. Lodder
(and posted with an obsolete newsclient too)

irrelevant.

[Ian McCall]

Post by J. J. Lodder
I communicate with my server, who passes it on to your server,
who passes it on to you.
No Facebooks, Googles, no sidelines of any kind

Do you remember the shock when people first came across Deja News? Until then
it was more or less understood that news servers rolled their posts every
week or so, maybe a fortnight if you were lucky. Realising posts from years
ago were still available - it was a shock, and not necessarily a pleasant
one.

Usenet was one of the very first things to be data-mined. I hate that fact,
but the open nature of it is what made it so completely vulnerable to
exploitation. I am so, so happy Deja News came out after my first
introduction to the internet and Usenet. I have no idea the naive garbage I
must have trotted out, and happily no-one will ever have an idea because
it’s earlier than when the collection started.But since at minimum the
mid-nineties, Usenet has been data-mined to hell.

Cheers,
Ian

[nospam]

Post by Ian McCall

Post by J. J. Lodder
I communicate with my server, who passes it on to your server,
who passes it on to you.
No Facebooks, Googles, no sidelines of any kind

Do you remember the shock when people first came across Deja News? Until then
it was more or less understood that news servers rolled their posts every
week or so, maybe a fortnight if you were lucky. Realising posts from years
ago were still available - it was a shock, and not necessarily a pleasant
one.
Usenet was one of the very first things to be data-mined. I hate that fact,
but the open nature of it is what made it so completely vulnerable to
exploitation. I am so, so happy Deja News came out after my first
introduction to the internet and Usenet. I have no idea the naive garbage I
must have trotted out, and happily no-one will ever have an idea because
it¹s earlier than when the collection started.But since at minimum the
mid-nineties, Usenet has been data-mined to hell.

i've seen stuff from as far back as the late '80s in google groups, who
bought deja news.

[Jaimie Vandenbergh]

Post by nospam

Post by Ian McCall

Post by J. J. Lodder
I communicate with my server, who passes it on to your server,
who passes it on to you.
No Facebooks, Googles, no sidelines of any kind

Do you remember the shock when people first came across Deja News? Until then
it was more or less understood that news servers rolled their posts every
week or so, maybe a fortnight if you were lucky. Realising posts from years
ago were still available - it was a shock, and not necessarily a pleasant
one.
Usenet was one of the very first things to be data-mined. I hate that fact,
but the open nature of it is what made it so completely vulnerable to
exploitation. I am so, so happy Deja News came out after my first
introduction to the internet and Usenet. I have no idea the naive garbage I
must have trotted out, and happily no-one will ever have an idea because
it¹s earlier than when the collection started.But since at minimum the
mid-nineties, Usenet has been data-mined to hell.

i've seen stuff from as far back as the late '80s in google groups, who
bought deja news.

Google - back in their not-being-very-evil days - went on an archive hunting
spree shortly after absorbing Deja, got a bunch of geeks to share their own
usenet archives which they were happy to do because of course they were!

It seems such an innocent time now...

Cheers - Jaimie

[Snit]

Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh

Post by nospam

Post by Ian McCall

Post by J. J. Lodder
I communicate with my server, who passes it on to your server,
who passes it on to you.
No Facebooks, Googles, no sidelines of any kind

Do you remember the shock when people first came across Deja News? Until then
it was more or less understood that news servers rolled their posts every
week or so, maybe a fortnight if you were lucky. Realising posts from years
ago were still available - it was a shock, and not necessarily a pleasant
one.
Usenet was one of the very first things to be data-mined. I hate that fact,
but the open nature of it is what made it so completely vulnerable to
exploitation. I am so, so happy Deja News came out after my first
introduction to the internet and Usenet. I have no idea the naive garbage I
must have trotted out, and happily no-one will ever have an idea because
it¹s earlier than when the collection started.But since at minimum the
mid-nineties, Usenet has been data-mined to hell.

i've seen stuff from as far back as the late '80s in google groups, who
bought deja news.

Google - back in their not-being-very-evil days - went on an archive hunting
spree shortly after absorbing Deja, got a bunch of geeks to share their own
usenet archives which they were happy to do because of course they were!
It seems such an innocent time now...
Cheers - Jaimie

I miss Deja News.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by Snit

Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh

Post by nospam

Post by Ian McCall

Post by J. J. Lodder
I communicate with my server, who passes it on to your server,
who passes it on to you.
No Facebooks, Googles, no sidelines of any kind

Do you remember the shock when people first came across Deja News?
Until then it was more or less understood that news servers rolled
their posts every week or so, maybe a fortnight if you were lucky.
Realising posts from years ago were still available - it was a shock,
and not necessarily a pleasant one.
Usenet was one of the very first things to be data-mined. I hate that
fact, but the open nature of it is what made it so completely
vulnerable to exploitation. I am so, so happy Deja News came out after
my first introduction to the internet and Usenet. I have no idea the
naive garbage I must have trotted out, and happily no-one will ever
have an idea because it?s earlier than when the collection started.But
since at minimum the mid-nineties, Usenet has been data-mined to hell.

i've seen stuff from as far back as the late '80s in google groups, who
bought deja news.

Google - back in their not-being-very-evil days - went on an archive hunting
spree shortly after absorbing Deja, got a bunch of geeks to share their own
usenet archives which they were happy to do because of course they were!
It seems such an innocent time now...
Cheers - Jaimie

I miss Deja News.

Thanks to MacSoup, I have my own private archives
for as long as I used MacSoup.
With disk prices being what they are there is no point in purging.

Far from complete though, far I don't have the threads
on subjects that didn't interest me at the time.

Back to the good old times of Rowland McDonald,
for uk.comp.sys.mac

And dear Rowland, in case you are still lurking,
my best wishes for the new year,

Jan

[Snit]

Post by nospam

Post by Ian McCall

Post by J. J. Lodder
I communicate with my server, who passes it on to your server,
who passes it on to you.
No Facebooks, Googles, no sidelines of any kind

Do you remember the shock when people first came across Deja News? Until then
it was more or less understood that news servers rolled their posts every
week or so, maybe a fortnight if you were lucky. Realising posts from years
ago were still available - it was a shock, and not necessarily a pleasant
one.
Usenet was one of the very first things to be data-mined. I hate that fact,
but the open nature of it is what made it so completely vulnerable to
exploitation. I am so, so happy Deja News came out after my first
introduction to the internet and Usenet. I have no idea the naive garbage I
must have trotted out, and happily no-one will ever have an idea because
it¹s earlier than when the collection started.But since at minimum the
mid-nineties, Usenet has been data-mined to hell.

i've seen stuff from as far back as the late '80s in google groups, who
bought deja news.

There is some, but some of the discussions I had are gone. Which is a
shame.

[Ian McCall]

Post by nospam
.
i've seen stuff from as far back as the late '80s in google groups, who
bought deja news.

Yep. There are tiny traces of a few of my older from about 1989, but not
under usernames that could be associated with me - you’d have to -really-
know what you were looking for.

The less-than-handful that have survived seem to be when I was asking
technical questions. None of the social stuff has - I assume due to new
server retention policies having wiped them before the concept of historic
searchable archives kicked off.


Cheers,
Ian

[Ian McCall]

new server retention policies

Newsserver. Newsserver retention policies.


Cheers,
Ian

[Snit]

Post by Ian McCall

Post by J. J. Lodder
I communicate with my server, who passes it on to your server,
who passes it on to you.
No Facebooks, Googles, no sidelines of any kind

Do you remember the shock when people first came across Deja News? Until then
it was more or less understood that news servers rolled their posts every
week or so, maybe a fortnight if you were lucky. Realising posts from years
ago were still available - it was a shock, and not necessarily a pleasant
one.
Usenet was one of the very first things to be data-mined. I hate that fact,
but the open nature of it is what made it so completely vulnerable to
exploitation. I am so, so happy Deja News came out after my first
introduction to the internet and Usenet. I have no idea the naive garbage I
must have trotted out, and happily no-one will ever have an idea because
it’s earlier than when the collection started.But since at minimum the
mid-nineties, Usenet has been data-mined to hell.
Cheers,
Ian

I had some great conversations that exist now only in my memory and
those I conversed with. Wish they were still around.

[Steve Carroll]

Post by Snit

Post by Ian McCall

Post by J. J. Lodder
I communicate with my server, who passes it on to your server,
who passes it on to you.
No Facebooks, Googles, no sidelines of any kind

Do you remember the shock when people first came across Deja News? Until then
it was more or less understood that news servers rolled their posts every
week or so, maybe a fortnight if you were lucky. Realising posts from years
ago were still available - it was a shock, and not necessarily a pleasant
one.
Usenet was one of the very first things to be data-mined. I hate that fact,
but the open nature of it is what made it so completely vulnerable to
exploitation. I am so, so happy Deja News came out after my first
introduction to the internet and Usenet. I have no idea the naive garbage I
must have trotted out, and happily no-one will ever have an idea because
it’s earlier than when the collection started.But since at minimum the
mid-nineties, Usenet has been data-mined to hell.
Cheers,
Ian

I had some great conversations that exist now only in my memory and
those I conversed with. Wish they were still around.
--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.
They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Post by Snit

Post by Ian McCall
<http://usenet.sandman.net/misc/postingtimes/Snit/Flooding> It doesn't show what
interval the script is run at, but how he has used it, at least in
the beginning. I stopped logging it this way back in may :)

From what I've personally looked at, it looks like it's all over the
map.

Yes, with obvious scripted sessions. Not saying some of it isn't manual.

Post by Snit

Post by Ian McCall
Maybe I'll update it :)

What would it take to do that?

For "later" to occur!

<http://usenet.sandman.net/misc/postingtimes/Snit/Flooding>

That's a running tally of Snit's non-sock posts and his flooding during the
last month. It'll update automatically and always show the last two months.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJZyKjaAAoJECFEwfBaA+jR4QEIAIWE3GfOGnnxynLfUhRnWv+l
OkvAvQ8GofGI1JjIOn7NnlyfGRV/JPiIzJmzoCrdV6uY9E9qaYOXScF4M5Vas4bv
2WqBlNIh7se9g6Zkj330L12RkuZckS5l0nJ++OTbmztOzLtAlrWKHADTiJ9u8JnR
BCjcAhMrjQ0Jwut34hJr57pzj7p88oYCPP46IcrEMbWnd03n43BGUVLGr9i9pYU+
7F6867hOzaFJ4DdRE52zv15yIYVUIHx7HFNNtV7ZfPRBRQQuyA403S8PM1RC/nQ/
RKau+ma21bzltpxlqTO+XAXMMLLZiGXy8hbv4Ib/tPlc5cKI3P6UDZ4exbbCmnE=
=1Dqa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Live on Kickstarter!!

https://www.google.com/search?q=prescott+computer+guy+michael+glasser+is+the+best
https://redd.it/6sfkup
Jonas Eklundh Communication AB

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by Ian McCall

Post by J. J. Lodder
I communicate with my server, who passes it on to your server,
who passes it on to you.
No Facebooks, Googles, no sidelines of any kind

Do you remember the shock when people first came across Deja News? Until then
it was more or less understood that news servers rolled their posts every
week or so, maybe a fortnight if you were lucky. Realising posts from years
ago were still available - it was a shock, and not necessarily a pleasant
one.

Sure, and then Google can along to spoil it again.

Post by Ian McCall
Usenet was one of the very first things to be data-mined. I hate that fact,
but the open nature of it is what made it so completely vulnerable to
exploitation. I am so, so happy Deja News came out after my first
introduction to the internet and Usenet. I have no idea the naive garbage I
must have trotted out, and happily no-one will ever have an idea because
it's earlier than when the collection started.But since at minimum the
mid-nineties, Usenet has been data-mined to hell.

Yes, but mainly for harvesting e-mail adresses,
and that has almost completely stopped too.
There is little on usenet that can be used for commercial purposes,
so that didn't happen,

Jan
(who has always had a working e-mail adress in all postings)

[nospam]

Post by J. J. Lodder
My point is that it should not be happening at all,
no matter what the idea is.

there are many reasons why it's perfectly legitimate.

since you use little snitch, it's trivial to block it and other apps.

this is also true for websites you visit, which connects with numerous
unrelated sites for tracking, ads, etc.

of course, there may be consequences for blocking anything. for
instance if an app validates its license, it could stop working. this
is the case with adobe creative cloud and many others.

Post by J. J. Lodder
Once you open a channel, behind the user's back,
everything is possible, up to complete logging.
It doesn't matter that the developpers say that nothing
is happening, really.
The point is that all kinds of abuses become possible.

that's always been the case, for more than 20 years.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
My point is that it should not be happening at all,
no matter what the idea is.

there are many reasons why it's perfectly legitimate.

There is no law on usenet.

Post by nospam
since you use little snitch, it's trivial to block it and other apps.

Not really, I dislike it, and it is almost always off.
Too much distraction.

Post by nospam
this is also true for websites you visit, which connects with numerous
unrelated sites for tracking, ads, etc.
of course, there may be consequences for blocking anything. for
instance if an app validates its license, it could stop working. this
is the case with adobe creative cloud and many others.

Yes, but there it is done under a contract,
and you know it.

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
Once you open a channel, behind the user's back,
everything is possible, up to complete logging.
It doesn't matter that the developpers say that nothing
is happening, really.
The point is that all kinds of abuses become possible.

that's always been the case, for more than 20 years.

You know of any?
I am quite sure for example that MacSoup
has never done such a thing.
Unison idem.
Perhaps you know of a usenet client that does?

Jan

[nospam]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
My point is that it should not be happening at all,
no matter what the idea is.

there are many reasons why it's perfectly legitimate.

There is no law on usenet.

it's not specific to usenet.

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam
since you use little snitch, it's trivial to block it and other apps.

Not really, I dislike it, and it is almost always off.
Too much distraction.

then you get to deal with apps phoning home.

your choice.

there's also no distraction either.

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam
this is also true for websites you visit, which connects with numerous
unrelated sites for tracking, ads, etc.
of course, there may be consequences for blocking anything. for
instance if an app validates its license, it could stop working. this
is the case with adobe creative cloud and many others.

Yes, but there it is done under a contract,
and you know it.

same with every other app you use.

you did read the end user license, right?

if not, you have only yourself to blame.

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
Once you open a channel, behind the user's back,
everything is possible, up to complete logging.
It doesn't matter that the developpers say that nothing
is happening, really.
The point is that all kinds of abuses become possible.

that's always been the case, for more than 20 years.

You know of any?

sure do.

as i said, nearly all apps phone home for some reason.

Post by J. J. Lodder
I am quite sure for example that MacSoup
has never done such a thing.
Unison idem.
Perhaps you know of a usenet client that does?

i do.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
My point is that it should not be happening at all,
no matter what the idea is.

there are many reasons why it's perfectly legitimate.

There is no law on usenet.

it's not specific to usenet.

Eh?? What else does Usenapp relate to?

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam
since you use little snitch, it's trivial to block it and other apps.

Not really, I dislike it, and it is almost always off.
Too much distraction.

then you get to deal with apps phoning home.
your choice.
there's also no distraction either.

Of course not. There is no lack of decent client software.

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam
this is also true for websites you visit, which connects with numerous
unrelated sites for tracking, ads, etc.
of course, there may be consequences for blocking anything. for
instance if an app validates its license, it could stop working. this
is the case with adobe creative cloud and many others.

Yes, but there it is done under a contract,
and you know it.

same with every other app you use.
you did read the end user license, right?
if not, you have only yourself to blame.

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
Once you open a channel, behind the user's back,
everything is possible, up to complete logging.
It doesn't matter that the developpers say that nothing
is happening, really.
The point is that all kinds of abuses become possible.

that's always been the case, for more than 20 years.

You know of any?

sure do.
as i said, nearly all apps phone home for some reason.

Post by J. J. Lodder
I am quite sure for example that MacSoup
has never done such a thing.
Unison idem.
Perhaps you know of a usenet client that does?

i do.

OK, so no answer,

Jan

[nospam]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
My point is that it should not be happening at all,
no matter what the idea is.

there are many reasons why it's perfectly legitimate.

There is no law on usenet.

it's not specific to usenet.

Eh?? What else does Usenapp relate to?

your issue is phoning home, but for some bizarre reason, you *only*
focus on usenet apps.

apps have been phoning home since it was possible to phone home, which
started a lot earlier than you might think.

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam
since you use little snitch, it's trivial to block it and other apps.

Not really, I dislike it, and it is almost always off.
Too much distraction.

then you get to deal with apps phoning home.
your choice.
there's also no distraction either.

Of course not. There is no lack of decent client software.

whoosh.

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam
this is also true for websites you visit, which connects with numerous
unrelated sites for tracking, ads, etc.
of course, there may be consequences for blocking anything. for
instance if an app validates its license, it could stop working. this
is the case with adobe creative cloud and many others.

Yes, but there it is done under a contract,
and you know it.

same with every other app you use.
you did read the end user license, right?
if not, you have only yourself to blame.

ok, so no answer.

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
Once you open a channel, behind the user's back,
everything is possible, up to complete logging.
It doesn't matter that the developpers say that nothing
is happening, really.
The point is that all kinds of abuses become possible.

that's always been the case, for more than 20 years.

You know of any?

sure do.
as i said, nearly all apps phone home for some reason.

Post by J. J. Lodder
I am quite sure for example that MacSoup
has never done such a thing.
Unison idem.
Perhaps you know of a usenet client that does?

i do.

OK, so no answer,

unlike your avoidance above, it was answered.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
My point is that it should not be happening at all,
no matter what the idea is.

there are many reasons why it's perfectly legitimate.

There is no law on usenet.

it's not specific to usenet.

Eh?? What else does Usenapp relate to?

your issue is phoning home, but for some bizarre reason, you *only*
focus on usenet apps.
apps have been phoning home since it was possible to phone home, which
started a lot earlier than you might think.

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam
since you use little snitch, it's trivial to block it and other apps.

Not really, I dislike it, and it is almost always off.
Too much distraction.

then you get to deal with apps phoning home.
your choice.
there's also no distraction either.

Of course not. There is no lack of decent client software.

whoosh.

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam
this is also true for websites you visit, which connects with numerous
unrelated sites for tracking, ads, etc.
of course, there may be consequences for blocking anything. for
instance if an app validates its license, it could stop working. this
is the case with adobe creative cloud and many others.

Yes, but there it is done under a contract,
and you know it.

same with every other app you use.
you did read the end user license, right?
if not, you have only yourself to blame.

ok, so no answer.

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
Once you open a channel, behind the user's back,
everything is possible, up to complete logging.
It doesn't matter that the developpers say that nothing
is happening, really.
The point is that all kinds of abuses become possible.

that's always been the case, for more than 20 years.

You know of any?

sure do.
as i said, nearly all apps phone home for some reason.

Post by J. J. Lodder
I am quite sure for example that MacSoup
has never done such a thing.
Unison idem.
Perhaps you know of a usenet client that does?

i do.

OK, so no answer,

unlike your avoidance above, it was answered.

And your other newsclient that phones home is....?

Jan

[Steve Carroll]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
My point is that it should not be happening at all,
no matter what the idea is.

there are many reasons why it's perfectly legitimate.

There is no law on usenet.

it's not specific to usenet.

Eh?? What else does Usenapp relate to?

your issue is phoning home, but for some bizarre reason, you *only*
focus on usenet apps.
apps have been phoning home since it was possible to phone home, which
started a lot earlier than you might think.

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam
since you use little snitch, it's trivial to block it and other apps.

Not really, I dislike it, and it is almost always off.
Too much distraction.

then you get to deal with apps phoning home.
your choice.
there's also no distraction either.

Of course not. There is no lack of decent client software.

whoosh.

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam
this is also true for websites you visit, which connects with numerous
unrelated sites for tracking, ads, etc.
of course, there may be consequences for blocking anything. for
instance if an app validates its license, it could stop working. this
is the case with adobe creative cloud and many others.

Yes, but there it is done under a contract,
and you know it.

same with every other app you use.
you did read the end user license, right?
if not, you have only yourself to blame.

ok, so no answer.

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
Once you open a channel, behind the user's back,
everything is possible, up to complete logging.
It doesn't matter that the developpers say that nothing
is happening, really.
The point is that all kinds of abuses become possible.

that's always been the case, for more than 20 years.

You know of any?

sure do.
as i said, nearly all apps phone home for some reason.

Post by J. J. Lodder
I am quite sure for example that MacSoup
has never done such a thing.
Unison idem.
Perhaps you know of a usenet client that does?

i do.

OK, so no answer,

unlike your avoidance above, it was answered.

And your other newsclient that phones home is....?
Jan

Ha, ha, ha, ha!

That is the problem 'today' and less experienced teachers don't care; people from earlier generations are the only ones who know better than to fall for socialism. I won't ask William Poaster how any part of Commander Kinsey's anatomy tastes no matter how many times William Poaster kisses it.

It is obvious that all of them are not automated because some of them are direct responses in very specific ways with attempts to mislead on specific issues, so not from a computer auto-generator. IOW, while some could be automated others are definitely not.



-
Live on Kickstarter
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.os.linux.advocacy/tzMH39QmAmU
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.os.linux/BVpdH5KOc6s
Jonas Eklundh

[David]

On 14/01/2020 17:20, J. J. Lodder wrote:
[....]

Post by J. J. Lodder
And your other newsclient that phones home is....?
Jan

Hi Jan

I'm not 100% certain - but I think Eternal-September does.

https://www.eternal-september.org/

Maybe you can check that for yourself with your monitoring software?

HTH

[Snit]

Post by David
[....]

Post by J. J. Lodder
And your other newsclient that phones home is....?
Jan

Hi Jan
I'm not 100% certain - but I think Eternal-September does.
https://www.eternal-september.org/
Maybe you can check that for yourself with your monitoring software?
HTH

Do they have their own client?

As far as others that have, though, pretty sure Entourage did.

Thunderbird does, too, though under Advanced you can turn it off (at
least the auto-updates)

[David]

Post by Snit

Post by David
[....]

Post by J. J. Lodder
And your other newsclient that phones home is....?
Jan

Hi Jan
I'm not 100% certain - but I think Eternal-September does.
https://www.eternal-september.org/
Maybe you can check that for yourself with your monitoring software?
HTH

Do they have their own client?

Oops! :-( I was thinking newsserver, not client. My apology to all readers.

Post by Snit
As far as others that have, though, pretty sure Entourage did.
Thunderbird does, too, though under Advanced you can turn it off (at
least the auto-updates)

I agree that Thunderbird does. I grant it permission (I have nothing to
hide!)

The fact that Usenapp does 'phone home' was fully explained before I
signed up to use it. I've been most impressed watching something new
develop. All credit to Andre. :-)

[Snit]

Post by David

Post by Snit

Post by David
[....]

Post by J. J. Lodder
And your other newsclient that phones home is....?
Jan

Hi Jan
I'm not 100% certain - but I think Eternal-September does.
https://www.eternal-september.org/
Maybe you can check that for yourself with your monitoring software?
HTH

Do they have their own client?

Oops! :-( I was thinking newsserver, not client. My apology to all readers.

Post by Snit
As far as others that have, though, pretty sure Entourage did.
Thunderbird does, too, though under Advanced you can turn it off (at
least the auto-updates)

I agree that Thunderbird does. I grant it permission (I have nothing to
hide!)
The fact that Usenapp does 'phone home' was fully explained before I
signed up to use it. I've been most impressed watching something new
develop. All credit to Andre. :-)

It is still in early stages but shows good promise.

[Steve Carroll]

Post by David
[....]

Post by J. J. Lodder
And your other newsclient that phones home is....?
Jan

Hi Jan
I'm not 100% certain - but I think Eternal-September does.
https://www.eternal-september.org/
Maybe you can check that for yourself with your monitoring software?
HTH
--
David

It is the same pattern that happens in every group Onion Knight attacks. This forum is a leaking porta potty.

Of course I quoted examples of Onion Knight attacking Char Jackson -- trolling multiple groups, etc. His response: to blame me.

I'm getting false positives in my kill filter. I'm guessing the circus has gone ballistic again. Drives the trolls crazy when they do not get attention. Nobody who isn't just using you for trolling ends sees you as anything remotely close to respectable. You have few but yourself to credit for that.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by David
[....]

Post by J. J. Lodder
And your other newsclient that phones home is....?
Jan

Hi Jan
I'm not 100% certain - but I think Eternal-September does.
https://www.eternal-september.org/
Maybe you can check that for yourself with your monitoring software?

??? Eternal september is its own home,
it's a newsserver,

Jan

[David]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by David
[....]

Post by J. J. Lodder
And your other newsclient that phones home is....?
Jan

Hi Jan
I'm not 100% certain - but I think Eternal-September does.
https://www.eternal-september.org/
Maybe you can check that for yourself with your monitoring software?

??? Eternal september is its own home,
it's a newsserver,

You are correct, Jan.

I made a mistake. I apologise.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by David

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by David
[....]

Post by J. J. Lodder
And your other newsclient that phones home is....?
Jan

Hi Jan
I'm not 100% certain - but I think Eternal-September does.
https://www.eternal-september.org/
Maybe you can check that for yourself with your monitoring software?

??? Eternal september is its own home,
it's a newsserver,

You are correct, Jan.
I made a mistake. I apologise.

No need to. In fact I have used eternal september
on many occasions.
My usual newsserver, and also the German one
refuse to post in moderated newsgroups.
No doubt a configuration error,
but no one seems to be able to get through to a responsible person.
Perhaps there are none left,

Jan

[Steve Carroll]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by J. J. Lodder
Last week my Little Snitch became active by accident.
To my surprise I saw that the Usenapp application phones home
to a server at xeroxsoft.com at every launch of the app,
and again to a different server also at xeroxsoft while the app runs.
This is to me completely unacceptable behaviour in a usenet client.
It should connect to the newsserver adresses I give it,
and to nowhere else.
So I have stopped using and testing Usenapp.
Xorox says this is done merely to validate the license,
but there is no way the user can see
what information Xorox actually collects from Usenapp users.
(or what may be collected in future versions of the app)
Also, the fact that Xoroxsoft has been secretly tracking
its alpha/beta testers has completely destroyed
my confidence in their nice words about privacy.
For the rest, each for himself in tolerance of privacy violations,
but I do advise Usenapp users to turn Little Snitch or similar on
to see for themselves what is happening,

Maybe it's checking for a newer version.

That too, and that too should be under user control
by means of a checkbox somewhere.
(check for new versions on launch yes/no)

I'm sure Andre will explain what is happening.

My point is that it should not be happening at all,
no matter what the idea is.
Once you open a channel, behind the user's back,
everything is possible, up to complete logging.
It doesn't matter that the developpers say that nothing
is happening, really.
The point is that all kinds of abuses become possible.
Usenet clients should -never- phone home,
and certainly not in secret,
Jan
PS Yes, I know that users have become used
to privacy having become nearly non-exisent,
on Facebook or Google for example.
But this is good old usenet, and those kind of abuses
shouldn't be introduced into it.

Now that nobody is replying to Alan 'Super Troll' B, he's making it sound like he's figured out the right timing -- when in fact, people are just not playing his game anymore. Ha, ha, ha, ha! Yup. It seems this is what we have to defeat. Jerks who have no reason for being here other than to flood.

After yesterday's update I no longer have a working system. Thanks Ubuntu! What is the Earth coming to when a Alan 'Super Troll' B sock/shill fails to get any notice...

--
Top Six Ways Alan 'Super Troll' B Trolls
http://tinyurl.com/kmqe66h
Automate Google Groups https://groups.google.com/forum/#!search/Petruzzellis$20or$20Carroll
http://prescottcomputerguy.com
Jonas Eklundh Communication

[Andre]

Post by Alan B

Post by J. J. Lodder
Last week my Little Snitch became active by accident.
To my surprise I saw that the Usenapp application phones home
to a server at xeroxsoft.com at every launch of the app,
and again to a different server also at xeroxsoft while the app runs.
This is to me completely unacceptable behaviour in a usenet client.
It should connect to the newsserver adresses I give it,
and to nowhere else.
So I have stopped using and testing Usenapp.
Xorox says this is done merely to validate the license,
but there is no way the user can see
what information Xorox actually collects from Usenapp users.
(or what may be collected in future versions of the app)
Also, the fact that Xoroxsoft has been secretly tracking
its alpha/beta testers has completely destroyed
my confidence in their nice words about privacy.
For the rest, each for himself in tolerance of privacy violations,
but I do advise Usenapp users to turn Little Snitch or similar on
to see for themselves what is happening,

Maybe it’s checking for a newer version. I’m sure Andre will explain what
is happening.

That is exactly what's happening.
I already explained to Jan that Usenapp checks if the license is valid when
starting up.
It also checks periodically for an update. That's all what is happening.

It's also stated in the Usenapp privacy policy that no personal data is
collected or logged.
https://www.usenapp.com/privacy/

According to Jan any app that checks if a license is valid is violating the
privacy of the end user.
Total nonsense of course.

And Jan, Usenapp doesn't connect to xeroxsoft.com, but to xoroxsoft.com which
is the main website of Xorox BV. (the company that develops Usenapp and other
software).



--
Thanks,
Andre.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by J. J. Lodder
Last week my Little Snitch became active by accident.
To my surprise I saw that the Usenapp application phones home
to a server at xeroxsoft.com at every launch of the app,
and again to a different server also at xeroxsoft while the app runs.
This is to me completely unacceptable behaviour in a usenet client.
It should connect to the newsserver adresses I give it,
and to nowhere else.
So I have stopped using and testing Usenapp.
Xorox says this is done merely to validate the license,
but there is no way the user can see
what information Xorox actually collects from Usenapp users.
(or what may be collected in future versions of the app)
Also, the fact that Xoroxsoft has been secretly tracking
its alpha/beta testers has completely destroyed
my confidence in their nice words about privacy.
For the rest, each for himself in tolerance of privacy violations,
but I do advise Usenapp users to turn Little Snitch or similar on
to see for themselves what is happening,

Maybe it's checking for a newer version. I'm sure Andre will explain what
is happening.

That is exactly what's happening. I already explained to Jan that Usenapp
checks if the license is valid whenstarting up.
It also checks periodically for an update. That's all what is happening.

Frankly, I do believe you on that, at least for now.

It's also stated in the Usenapp privacy policy that no personal data
iscollected or logged. https://www.usenapp.com/privacy/

Frankly again, I don't believe Xorox on that.
The fact that Xorox have been spying on its voluntary alpha/beta testers
-without telling them- has destroyed my confidence
in whatever Xorox' privacy policy may be saying.

According to Jan any app that checks if a license is valid is violating
theprivacy of the end user. Total nonsense of course.

Phoning home is, whatever the purpose or excuse.

And Jan, Usenapp doesn't connect to xeroxsoft.com, but to xoroxsoft.com

whichis the main website of Xorox BV. (the company that develops
Usenapp and othersoftware).

??? That's what I have been saying all along,
an occasional typo excepted perhaps.

But it doesn't matter what it is connecting too,
it shouldn't connect anywhere,
except to the newsservers given by the user in the prefs.,

Jan

PS You should turn on line wrapping.

[nospam]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Andre
It's also stated in the Usenapp privacy policy that no personal data
iscollected or logged. https://www.usenapp.com/privacy/

Frankly again, I don't believe Xorox on that.
The fact that Xorox have been spying on its voluntary alpha/beta testers
-without telling them- has destroyed my confidence
in whatever Xorox' privacy policy may be saying.

what's your proof they never told anyone?

not that it matters, because i'm sure they're thrilled that you're not
a customer.

[Jaimie Vandenbergh]

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Andre
It's also stated in the Usenapp privacy policy that no personal data
iscollected or logged. https://www.usenapp.com/privacy/

Frankly again, I don't believe Xorox on that.
The fact that Xorox have been spying on its voluntary alpha/beta testers
-without telling them- has destroyed my confidence
in whatever Xorox' privacy policy may be saying.

what's your proof they never told anyone?

I for one was entirely aware there was a callback, ever since the first
"update available!" popup.

Not that I'm a customer yet, but I'd love to pay for it.

Post by nospam
not that it matters, because i'm sure they're thrilled that you're not
a customer.

Indeed.

Cheers - Jaimie

[Steve Carroll]

Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Andre
It's also stated in the Usenapp privacy policy that no personal data
iscollected or logged. https://www.usenapp.com/privacy/

Frankly again, I don't believe Xorox on that.
The fact that Xorox have been spying on its voluntary alpha/beta testers
-without telling them- has destroyed my confidence
in whatever Xorox' privacy policy may be saying.

what's your proof they never told anyone?

I for one was entirely aware there was a callback, ever since the first
"update available!" popup.
Not that I'm a customer yet, but I'd love to pay for it.

Post by nospam
not that it matters, because i'm sure they're thrilled that you're not
a customer.

Indeed.
Cheers - Jaimie
--
"Please stop telling us what you feel. Please stop telling us what your
intuition is. Your intuitive feelings are of no interest whatsoever,
and nor are mine. I don't give a bugger what you feel, or what I feel.
I want to know what the evidence shows." -- Richard Dawkins

In fact Commander Kinsey's lies got bigger. So as might be expected I regret being kind to Commander Kinsey. While I am sure his shills approved of it, he has taught me to never try to appease a troll. You saying something is so does not make it true. He upsets multiple groups of people who are mere civilians, but that's a self-centered troll for you. What RonB and I care about isn't a factor. Do you have a high school diploma? I guess this is what arises when acutely low faith in oneself takes over Commander Kinsey's mind.

--
My Snoring Solution!
Automate Google Groups https://groups.google.com/forum/#!search/Petruzzellis$20or$20Carroll
http://www.macadvocacy.pw/2005/Nov/09/236626.html
Jonas Eklundh Communication

[Steve Carroll]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by J. J. Lodder
Last week my Little Snitch became active by accident.
To my surprise I saw that the Usenapp application phones home
to a server at xeroxsoft.com at every launch of the app,
and again to a different server also at xeroxsoft while the app runs.
This is to me completely unacceptable behaviour in a usenet client.
It should connect to the newsserver adresses I give it,
and to nowhere else.
So I have stopped using and testing Usenapp.
Xorox says this is done merely to validate the license,
but there is no way the user can see
what information Xorox actually collects from Usenapp users.
(or what may be collected in future versions of the app)
Also, the fact that Xoroxsoft has been secretly tracking
its alpha/beta testers has completely destroyed
my confidence in their nice words about privacy.
For the rest, each for himself in tolerance of privacy violations,
but I do advise Usenapp users to turn Little Snitch or similar on
to see for themselves what is happening,

Maybe it's checking for a newer version. I'm sure Andre will explain what
is happening.

That is exactly what's happening. I already explained to Jan that Usenapp
checks if the license is valid whenstarting up.
It also checks periodically for an update. That's all what is happening.

Frankly, I do believe you on that, at least for now.

It's also stated in the Usenapp privacy policy that no personal data
iscollected or logged. https://www.usenapp.com/privacy/

Frankly again, I don't believe Xorox on that.
The fact that Xorox have been spying on its voluntary alpha/beta testers
-without telling them- has destroyed my confidence
in whatever Xorox' privacy policy may be saying.

According to Jan any app that checks if a license is valid is violating
theprivacy of the end user. Total nonsense of course.

Phoning home is, whatever the purpose or excuse.

And Jan, Usenapp doesn't connect to xeroxsoft.com, but to xoroxsoft.com

whichis the main website of Xorox BV. (the company that develops
Usenapp and othersoftware).
??? That's what I have been saying all along,
an occasional typo excepted perhaps.
But it doesn't matter what it is connecting too,
it shouldn't connect anywhere,
except to the newsservers given by the user in the prefs.,
Jan
PS You should turn on line wrapping.

Facts about Steve "Steven Petruzzellis" Carroll

Steve "Steven Petruzzellis" Carroll turned 60 years old back on August 29, 2018 and yet is still single, broke and yet with his skills he has nothing to show for it but flooding Usenet. He blames jbrennand for his loss of his wife and girlfriend and his begging of older women to sleep with him (http://www.seniorpeoplemeet.com/v3/externalsearch/singles?Profile=1AE1BDAAFC6D6F08ACA0C235BB8ED21D&Username=STEVECARROL). Steven is jealous of what jbrennand has and in a narcissistic rage repeatedly works to take it away from him. For over 15 years he has failed at even this. Steve "Steven Petruzzellis" Carroll is an utter failure in life.

Of his online life Steven says

I've been booted off by past providers before because people
complain about me and all my bullshit. I don't want to lose my ISP
*again* but I still need my army of sock puppets so I continually
search usenet for whatever servers I haven't yet been booted
from.

Some examples where Steven has been booted

X10 Hosting booted Steven for inappropriate activity
http://tinyurl.com/z92qmz4

Comcast booted Steven for inappropriate activity
http://tinyurl.com/h75nh9l

FreeHostingEU booted Steven for copyright infringement http://devsite.eu.pn

AwardSpace (atwebpages.com) booted Steven for breaking terms of service
http://demsites.atwebpages.com/pokeman

Imgur took down an image for breaking terms of service http://imgur.com/yv2XppE

Had a GigaNews account which was removed for harassing jbrennand

Stopped posting from his fretwizzen Google account since shortly after I complained. Seems he lost that too.

His wife booted Steven to the curb for cheating on her



Only site Steven Petruzzellis has pointed to that has ever been available
http://web.archive.org/web/20161019062351/http://www.oldneighborhoodrestaurant.net/
https://goo.gl/DMno6J

Made by the Go Daddy Website builder and is utter crap. Later he denied he said he was merely taking credit for someone else's work but Steven is the contact person http://tinyurl.com/hcw6dul
http://web.archive.org/web/20161202192456/http://www.reservationdiary.eu/eng/reservation/d76d1156-e9f7-43c1-b77b-b07189857820

He also bragged he was working on an update and showed it here

The business still failed.

He likely went to the Go Daddy Website Builder after he failed to get WordPress installed.

https://mu.wordpress.org/forums/topic/13879


This is why Steve "Steven Petruzzellis" Carroll attacks jbrennand.


Steven Petruzzellis was divorced on June 22 , 2012 at the Golden Municipal Court House because his wife caught him screwing another woman.

jbrennand is married and by all appearances happily so.
He never complains about his wife in COLA.


Steven Petruzzellis is living on charity of a friend in a single room.

jbrennand does not live in a mansion or even a high end home but has a house and a yard.


Steven Petruzzellis has two kids but no respect. He repeatedly called Ryan his "little screwup" and refers to his son Steve as a "dick" and worse. He says at least one of them likely hacked his computer and is a "mentally deficient child." He mocks his possible future daughter-in-law as someone who takes too many selfies and is focused only on herself

jbrennand has two kids (or more) and never speaks poorly of them in public.
No reason to think they are not a happy family.


Steven Petruzzellis claims to be a stay at home dad who pays thousands of dollars for day care. Steven has no job and no purpose in life. Steven has given up and now seeks a mother-figure to date.

jbrennand has his own business doing technical work and also teaches.
jbrennand offers a true contribution to society.
Teachers are truly under appreciated.

--
I Left My Husband & Daughter At Home And THIS happened
http://tinyurl.com/proof-about-ebot
http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/BilkHelp.html
Jonas Eklundh Communication

[nospam]

Post by J. J. Lodder
Last week my Little Snitch became active by accident.
To my surprise I saw that the Usenapp application phones home
to a server at xeroxsoft.com at every launch of the app,
and again to a different server also at xeroxsoft while the app runs.
This is to me completely unacceptable behaviour in a usenet client.
It should connect to the newsserver adresses I give it,
and to nowhere else.
So I have stopped using and testing Usenapp.
Xorox says this is done merely to validate the license,
but there is no way the user can see
what information Xorox actually collects from Usenapp users.
(or what may be collected in future versions of the app)
Also, the fact that Xoroxsoft has been secretly tracking
its alpha/beta testers has completely destroyed
my confidence in their nice words about privacy.
For the rest, each for himself in tolerance of privacy violations,
but I do advise Usenapp users to turn Little Snitch or similar on
to see for themselves what is happening,

you need to stop using computers.

nearly all apps 'phone home' to check for updates. validate license
keys and/or send crash logs and anonymous analytics.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
Last week my Little Snitch became active by accident.
To my surprise I saw that the Usenapp application phones home
to a server at xeroxsoft.com at every launch of the app,
and again to a different server also at xeroxsoft while the app runs.
This is to me completely unacceptable behaviour in a usenet client.
It should connect to the newsserver adresses I give it,
and to nowhere else.
So I have stopped using and testing Usenapp.
Xorox says this is done merely to validate the license,
but there is no way the user can see
what information Xorox actually collects from Usenapp users.
(or what may be collected in future versions of the app)
Also, the fact that Xoroxsoft has been secretly tracking
its alpha/beta testers has completely destroyed
my confidence in their nice words about privacy.
For the rest, each for himself in tolerance of privacy violations,
but I do advise Usenapp users to turn Little Snitch or similar on
to see for themselves what is happening,

you need to stop using computers.
nearly all apps 'phone home' to check for updates. validate license
keys and/or send crash logs and anonymous analytics.

Perhaps, but none of my usenet clients do it,
and I am not aware of others that do,

Jan

[nospam]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
Last week my Little Snitch became active by accident.
To my surprise I saw that the Usenapp application phones home
to a server at xeroxsoft.com at every launch of the app,
and again to a different server also at xeroxsoft while the app runs.
This is to me completely unacceptable behaviour in a usenet client.
It should connect to the newsserver adresses I give it,
and to nowhere else.
So I have stopped using and testing Usenapp.
Xorox says this is done merely to validate the license,
but there is no way the user can see
what information Xorox actually collects from Usenapp users.
(or what may be collected in future versions of the app)
Also, the fact that Xoroxsoft has been secretly tracking
its alpha/beta testers has completely destroyed
my confidence in their nice words about privacy.
For the rest, each for himself in tolerance of privacy violations,
but I do advise Usenapp users to turn Little Snitch or similar on
to see for themselves what is happening,

you need to stop using computers.
nearly all apps 'phone home' to check for updates. validate license
keys and/or send crash logs and anonymous analytics.

Perhaps, but none of my usenet clients do it,
and I am not aware of others that do,

why focus on just usenet clients?

as i said, nearly all apps have some level of 'phoning home'.

although many of them state exactly what it's for, you have *no* way to
know what it's actually doing.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
Last week my Little Snitch became active by accident.
To my surprise I saw that the Usenapp application phones home
to a server at xeroxsoft.com at every launch of the app,
and again to a different server also at xeroxsoft while the app runs.
This is to me completely unacceptable behaviour in a usenet client.
It should connect to the newsserver adresses I give it,
and to nowhere else.
So I have stopped using and testing Usenapp.
Xorox says this is done merely to validate the license,
but there is no way the user can see
what information Xorox actually collects from Usenapp users.
(or what may be collected in future versions of the app)
Also, the fact that Xoroxsoft has been secretly tracking
its alpha/beta testers has completely destroyed
my confidence in their nice words about privacy.
For the rest, each for himself in tolerance of privacy violations,
but I do advise Usenapp users to turn Little Snitch or similar on
to see for themselves what is happening,

you need to stop using computers.
nearly all apps 'phone home' to check for updates. validate license
keys and/or send crash logs and anonymous analytics.

Perhaps, but none of my usenet clients do it,
and I am not aware of others that do,

why focus on just usenet clients?

Because usenet is usenet, and phoning home is -not done- on usenet.
I see no good reason or justification to start doing it.

Post by nospam
as i said, nearly all apps have some level of 'phoning home'.
although many of them state exactly what it's for, you have *no* way to
know what it's actually doing.

For this purpose I don't care what other apps may or may not be doing.
Let's stick with usenet clients,

Jan

[nospam]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam
you need to stop using computers.
nearly all apps 'phone home' to check for updates. validate license
keys and/or send crash logs and anonymous analytics.

Perhaps, but none of my usenet clients do it,
and I am not aware of others that do,

why focus on just usenet clients?

Because usenet is usenet, and phoning home is -not done- on usenet.
I see no good reason or justification to start doing it.

just because you don't see any justification doesn't mean there isn't
any.

apps phoning home has been going on for years for all sorts of reasons.

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam
as i said, nearly all apps have some level of 'phoning home'.
although many of them state exactly what it's for, you have *no* way to
know what it's actually doing.

For this purpose I don't care what other apps may or may not be doing.
Let's stick with usenet clients,

that makes you a hypocrite.

[Andre]

Post by J. J. Lodder
Perhaps, but none of my usenet clients do it,
and I am not aware of others that do,

If you obtain an app through the App Store then there an no licenses involve
and no checking for licenses is required.
However, any non-free app from outside the App Store always work with licence
and they need to be checked.

If not then it is most likely a cracked version.


-
Thanks
Andre.

[Andy Hewitt]

Post by J. J. Lodder
Perhaps, but none of my usenet clients do it,
and I am not aware of others that do,

If you obtain an app through the App Store then there an no licenses involved
and no checking for licenses is required.
However, any non-free app from outside the App Store always work with licences
and they need to be checked.
If not then it is most likely a cracked version.

Why do you think people used Little Snitch in the first place?

[Steve Carroll]

Post by Andy Hewitt

Post by J. J. Lodder
Perhaps, but none of my usenet clients do it,
and I am not aware of others that do,

If you obtain an app through the App Store then there an no licenses involved
and no checking for licenses is required.
However, any non-free app from outside the App Store always work with licences
and they need to be checked.
If not then it is most likely a cracked version.

Why do you think people used Little Snitch in the first place?
--
Andy H

By the way, taking time getting informed isn't a waste. Asserting you know all and working to 'prove' Amanda Ripanykhazova that it's true? *That* is a waste.

Everyone is Tattoo Vampire -- the oldest gag in the book. Once Amanda Ripanykhazova realized how convincing Tattoo Vampire is at playing 'injured party' he realizes this isn't as outta whack as it appeared. How long has this debate been going on? Tattoo Vampire lies so frequently that he has a impossible time keeping record of his lies. Or his sock puppets of course.

[Andre]

Post by J. J. Lodder
Last week my Little Snitch became active by accident.
To my surprise I saw that the Usenapp application phones home
to a server at xeroxsoft.com at every launch of the app,
and again to a different server also at xeroxsoft while the app runs.
This is to me completely unacceptable behaviour in a usenet client.
It should connect to the newsserver adresses I give it,
and to nowhere else.
So I have stopped using and testing Usenapp.
Xorox says this is done merely to validate the license,
but there is no way the user can see
what information Xorox actually collects from Usenapp users.
(or what may be collected in future versions of the app)
Also, the fact that Xoroxsoft has been secretly tracking
its alpha/beta testers has completely destroyed
my confidence in their nice words about privacy.
For the rest, each for himself in tolerance of privacy violations,
but I do advise Usenapp users to turn Little Snitch or similar on
to see for themselves what is happening,
Jan

Jan, as I already told you Usenapp only communicates with 'home' for:

1) At startup to validate the license.
2) Periodically checks for an update.

Also, check your Little Snitch for the size of the data that is being sent.
It is 100-150 bytes max. Do you really think that your whole hard-drive or an
other sensitive data is captured in this small packet?


--
Thanks
Andre.

[nospam]

Post by Andre
Also, check your Little Snitch for the size of the data that is being sent.
It is 100-150 bytes max. Do you really think that your whole hard-drive or any
other sensitive data is captured in this small packet?

modern data compression is amazing :)

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by Andre

Post by J. J. Lodder
Last week my Little Snitch became active by accident.
To my surprise I saw that the Usenapp application phones home
to a server at xeroxsoft.com at every launch of the app,
and again to a different server also at xeroxsoft while the app runs.
This is to me completely unacceptable behaviour in a usenet client.
It should connect to the newsserver adresses I give it,
and to nowhere else.
So I have stopped using and testing Usenapp.
Xorox says this is done merely to validate the license,
but there is no way the user can see
what information Xorox actually collects from Usenapp users.
(or what may be collected in future versions of the app)
Also, the fact that Xoroxsoft has been secretly tracking
its alpha/beta testers has completely destroyed
my confidence in their nice words about privacy.
For the rest, each for himself in tolerance of privacy violations,
but I do advise Usenapp users to turn Little Snitch or similar on
to see for themselves what is happening,
Jan

1) At startup to validate the license.
2) Periodically checks for an update.

That's what it does now. Who knows what it will do next?

Post by Andre
Also, check your Little Snitch for the size of the data that is being
sent. It is 100-150 bytes max. Do you really think that your whole
hard-drive or anyother sensitive data is captured in this small packet?

BTW, you could have saved yourself all this trouble
by not spying on your alpha/beta testers.

Those people were trying to help you, remember?

Jan

[Snit]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Andre

Post by J. J. Lodder
Last week my Little Snitch became active by accident.
To my surprise I saw that the Usenapp application phones home
to a server at xeroxsoft.com at every launch of the app,
and again to a different server also at xeroxsoft while the app runs.
This is to me completely unacceptable behaviour in a usenet client.
It should connect to the newsserver adresses I give it,
and to nowhere else.
So I have stopped using and testing Usenapp.
Xorox says this is done merely to validate the license,
but there is no way the user can see
what information Xorox actually collects from Usenapp users.
(or what may be collected in future versions of the app)
Also, the fact that Xoroxsoft has been secretly tracking
its alpha/beta testers has completely destroyed
my confidence in their nice words about privacy.
For the rest, each for himself in tolerance of privacy violations,
but I do advise Usenapp users to turn Little Snitch or similar on
to see for themselves what is happening,
Jan

1) At startup to validate the license.
2) Periodically checks for an update.

That's what it does now. Who knows what it will do next?

Post by Andre
Also, check your Little Snitch for the size of the data that is being
sent. It is 100-150 bytes max. Do you really think that your whole
hard-drive or anyother sensitive data is captured in this small packet?

BTW, you could have saved yourself all this trouble
by not spying on your alpha/beta testers.
Those people were trying to help you, remember?
Jan

I understand and sympathize with your concern. How else would you suggest
the software check for licensing and updates?

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by Snit

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Andre

Post by J. J. Lodder
Last week my Little Snitch became active by accident.
To my surprise I saw that the Usenapp application phones home
to a server at xeroxsoft.com at every launch of the app,
and again to a different server also at xeroxsoft while the app runs.
This is to me completely unacceptable behaviour in a usenet client.
It should connect to the newsserver adresses I give it,
and to nowhere else.
So I have stopped using and testing Usenapp.
Xorox says this is done merely to validate the license,
but there is no way the user can see
what information Xorox actually collects from Usenapp users.
(or what may be collected in future versions of the app)
Also, the fact that Xoroxsoft has been secretly tracking
its alpha/beta testers has completely destroyed
my confidence in their nice words about privacy.
For the rest, each for himself in tolerance of privacy violations,
but I do advise Usenapp users to turn Little Snitch or similar on
to see for themselves what is happening,
Jan

1) At startup to validate the license.
2) Periodically checks for an update.

That's what it does now. Who knows what it will do next?

Post by Andre
Also, check your Little Snitch for the size of the data that is being
sent. It is 100-150 bytes max. Do you really think that your whole
hard-drive or anyother sensitive data is captured in this small packet?

BTW, you could have saved yourself all this trouble
by not spying on your alpha/beta testers.
Those people were trying to help you, remember?
Jan

I understand and sympathize with your concern. How else would you suggest
the software check for licensing and updates?

That's two questions.
The first has a nearly universal answer afaics:
Most software I know about allows you to set it in the prefs:
Automatically check for updates yes/no. [1]

The second (generating income) is really Xoroxsoft's problem.
Most software solves it by means of distributing licence keys.
(and perhaps incorporating blacklists of abused keys in new versions,
or revampinging the keys for a major new version)
Most shareware-like programs seem to do fairly well on that basis.
We all know examples of that, some of them classic Mac programs.
If you offer a good thing at a reasonable price
most people will pay for it.
That holds for Usenapp as well, for their price is reasonable.

The question is how far you are willing to go
for perhaps a few dollars more.
As far as I'm concerned 'phoning home', and that in secret,
is a bridge too far, (and imho overkill)
Phoning home loses you customers too,
especially so for a usenet client,

Jan

[1] Set to 'No' in most cases for me.
Some updates are not an improvement, or even a disaster,
and it may be hard to recover if it corrups a database.
I prefer to wait until it is clear that it is a good thing
rather than be an early adopter.

[Snit]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Snit

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Andre

Post by J. J. Lodder
Last week my Little Snitch became active by accident.
To my surprise I saw that the Usenapp application phones home
to a server at xeroxsoft.com at every launch of the app,
and again to a different server also at xeroxsoft while the app runs.
This is to me completely unacceptable behaviour in a usenet client.
It should connect to the newsserver adresses I give it,
and to nowhere else.
So I have stopped using and testing Usenapp.
Xorox says this is done merely to validate the license,
but there is no way the user can see
what information Xorox actually collects from Usenapp users.
(or what may be collected in future versions of the app)
Also, the fact that Xoroxsoft has been secretly tracking
its alpha/beta testers has completely destroyed
my confidence in their nice words about privacy.
For the rest, each for himself in tolerance of privacy violations,
but I do advise Usenapp users to turn Little Snitch or similar on
to see for themselves what is happening,
Jan

1) At startup to validate the license.
2) Periodically checks for an update.

That's what it does now. Who knows what it will do next?

Post by Andre
Also, check your Little Snitch for the size of the data that is being
sent. It is 100-150 bytes max. Do you really think that your whole
hard-drive or anyother sensitive data is captured in this small packet?

BTW, you could have saved yourself all this trouble
by not spying on your alpha/beta testers.
Those people were trying to help you, remember?
Jan

I understand and sympathize with your concern. How else would you suggest
the software check for licensing and updates?

That's two questions.
Automatically check for updates yes/no. [1]

OK, a setting for this. I can see where it would be good to request it
while in alpha testing. Sure.

Post by J. J. Lodder
The second (generating income) is really Xoroxsoft's problem.

Well, and anyone who wants it to stick around!

Post by J. J. Lodder
Most software solves it by means of distributing licence keys.
(and perhaps incorporating blacklists of abused keys in new versions,
or revampinging the keys for a major new version)
Most shareware-like programs seem to do fairly well on that basis.
We all know examples of that, some of them classic Mac programs.
If you offer a good thing at a reasonable price
most people will pay for it.
That holds for Usenapp as well, for their price is reasonable.
The question is how far you are willing to go
for perhaps a few dollars more.
As far as I'm concerned 'phoning home', and that in secret,
is a bridge too far, (and imho overkill)
Phoning home loses you customers too,
especially so for a usenet client,

Sounds like you do not want to use the app. And that is OK.

Post by J. J. Lodder
Jan
[1] Set to 'No' in most cases for me.
Some updates are not an improvement, or even a disaster,
and it may be hard to recover if it corrups a database.
I prefer to wait until it is clear that it is a good thing
rather than be an early adopter.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by Snit

Post by J. J. Lodder
The question is how far you are willing to go
for perhaps a few dollars more.
As far as I'm concerned 'phoning home', and that in secret,
is a bridge too far, (and imho overkill)
Phoning home loses you customers too,
especially so for a usenet client,

Sounds like you do not want to use the app. And that is OK.

You are mistaken about that.
I really welcomed it at first sight, tried it,
and I found some bugs and gave some suggestions for improvements.
(but that was before I found out about the phoning home)
I still think Usenapp can evolve into a great usenet client.

But as long as Usenapp insists on phoning home I won't touch it
with the proverbial ten foot pole,

Jan

[Snit]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Snit

Post by J. J. Lodder
The question is how far you are willing to go
for perhaps a few dollars more.
As far as I'm concerned 'phoning home', and that in secret,
is a bridge too far, (and imho overkill)
Phoning home loses you customers too,
especially so for a usenet client,

Sounds like you do not want to use the app. And that is OK.

You are mistaken about that.
I really welcomed it at first sight, tried it,
and I found some bugs and gave some suggestions for improvements.
(but that was before I found out about the phoning home)
I still think Usenapp can evolve into a great usenet client.
But as long as Usenapp insists on phoning home I won't touch it
with the proverbial ten foot pole,

Sounds like you do not want to use the app. And that is OK.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by Snit

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Snit

Post by J. J. Lodder
The question is how far you are willing to go
for perhaps a few dollars more.
As far as I'm concerned 'phoning home', and that in secret,
is a bridge too far, (and imho overkill)
Phoning home loses you customers too,
especially so for a usenet client,

Sounds like you do not want to use the app. And that is OK.

You are mistaken about that.
I really welcomed it at first sight, tried it,
and I found some bugs and gave some suggestions for improvements.
(but that was before I found out about the phoning home)
I still think Usenapp can evolve into a great usenet client.
But as long as Usenapp insists on phoning home I won't touch it
with the proverbial ten foot pole,

Sounds like you do not want to use the app. And that is OK.

My reasons for looking at Usenapp were not an expectation
that it would be usable for me in the short term.
In its present immature state it is no match (for me)
for usenet apps already in existence.

Looking at it was for me an attempt at trying to help,
to help making it better,
for the availability of new, and potentially better usenet apps
is in the common interest of all of us.
It helps keeping usenet alive for as long as possible.

Now I know I will never be using it,
but if it gets used by people
who don't mind being spied upon
it will still be a good thing,

Jan

[nospam]

Post by J. J. Lodder
But as long as Usenapp insists on phoning home I won't touch it
with the proverbial ten foot pole,

you also need to stop using just about every app and stop visiting just
about every website.

[Snit]

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
But as long as Usenapp insists on phoning home I won't touch it
with the proverbial ten foot pole,

you also need to stop using just about every app and stop visiting just
about every website.

What is weird is he seems to share his actual IP with his posts. Maybe
it is a proxy? I certainly am not gonna check... but just seems odd.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
But as long as Usenapp insists on phoning home I won't touch it
with the proverbial ten foot pole,

you also need to stop using just about every app and stop visiting just
about every website.

No problem, there is no lack of good newsclients
that behave as a newsclient should,

Jan

[nospam]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
But as long as Usenapp insists on phoning home I won't touch it
with the proverbial ten foot pole,

you also need to stop using just about every app and stop visiting just
about every website.

No problem, there is no lack of good newsclients
that behave as a newsclient should,

what part of every app and website is not clear?

[Steve Carroll]

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
But as long as Usenapp insists on phoning home I won't touch it
with the proverbial ten foot pole,

you also need to stop using just about every app and stop visiting just
about every website.

No problem, there is no lack of good newsclients
that behave as a newsclient should,

what part of every app and website is not clear?

That is the problem 'today' and American instructors don't stand a chance, people from smarter generations SHOULD know better than to fall for communism. Char Jackson proved himself to be a fraud by having the pretense to not engage jbrennand by means of veraciously trumpeting 'score: -999' and then engaging him anyhow through a 3rd party. By getting an education from 'experts' like that you get moral imperatives like 'equal rights'. Carried to its (im)moral conclusion, the insistence that it's 'insensitive' for a conservative male to not wish to screw a transvestite is established. SC's update system failed over and over again.

--
Eight things to never feed your cat!
http://youtu.be/IhOfBmWwCVY

http://prescottcomputerguy.com
Jonas Eklundh Communication

[David]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
But as long as Usenapp insists on phoning home I won't touch it
with the proverbial ten foot pole,

you also need to stop using just about every app and stop visiting just
about every website.

No problem, there is no lack of good newsclients
that behave as a newsclient should,
Jan

Thanks for your understanding.

I note that you are using something called MacSoup.

Have you seen this? http://www.haller-berlin.de/macsoup/index.html

It's not available in the App Store. How certain are you that it's safe
to use? If it *IS* 'safe', how does one get it?

[Snit]

Post by David

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
But as long as Usenapp insists on phoning home I won't touch it
with the proverbial ten foot pole,

you also need to stop using just about every app and stop visiting just
about every website.

No problem, there is no lack of good newsclients
that behave as a newsclient should,
Jan

Thanks for your understanding.
I note that you are using something called MacSoup.
Have you seen this? http://www.haller-berlin.de/macsoup/index.html
It's not available in the App Store. How certain are you that it's safe
to use?  If it *IS* 'safe', how does one get it?

cnet is a pretty reputable source.

https://download.cnet.com/MacSOUP/3000-2164_4-10001549.html

Do not know if it is the most recent version. I do not think it runs on
the newest macOS.

[nospam]

Post by Snit

Post by David
It's not available in the App Store. How certain are you that it's safe
to use?  If it *IS* 'safe', how does one get it?

cnet is a pretty reputable source.

definitely not. they have been known to add extra stuff.

[Snit]

Post by nospam

Post by Snit

Post by David
It's not available in the App Store. How certain are you that it's safe
to use?  If it *IS* 'safe', how does one get it?

cnet is a pretty reputable source.

definitely not. they have been known to add extra stuff.

I am open to evidence of that.

[Snit]

Post by Snit

Post by nospam

Post by Snit

Post by David
It's not available in the App Store. How certain are you that it's safe
to use?  If it *IS* 'safe', how does one get it?

cnet is a pretty reputable source.

definitely not. they have been known to add extra stuff.

I am open to evidence of that.

<https://www.securemac.com/security-advisory/cnet-adware-identification-
and-removal-guide-for-mac-os-x>
The links for many popular Mac apps on CNET¹s download.com have
been replaced with a ³CNET installer² that installs toolbar adware
and changes browser settings. This guide shows how to identify
affected apps, how to avoid the toolbar installer, how to determine
if it has been installed on your system, and how to remove it if so.
<https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/forums/t/510527/cnet-and-malware/>
I used CNET for years to download  all sorts of programs but now when
I try to download one it moves me to download.com (it says powered by
CNET) and that site tries to download and install five different
malwares, misdirections ,and unwanted browser add ons that change
my homepage and search engine. What happened to them and is there
a safe alternative download site ?
...
You should stay away from Download-dot-com or cnet. If you try to
download something from there, a downloader program is downloaded
instead which much be run to download the intended program. But that
downloader also installs some other crap.
<https://www.ghacks.net/2011/08/17/the-cnet-download-com-installer/>
I first thought that the developers of CureIt had provided the
installer, turned out I was wrong. Cnet, at least for this download
and probably for all downloads on the site, is not offering direct
links to those setup files anymore. Instead, a web downloader,
called CNET Download.com installer, is provided.
This in itself is problematic as it means that users need to run
the download.com installer first to download the setup file of the
software that they initially wanted to download. That's additional
work for the user.
The real problem here however is that the web installer is pushing
the Babylon toolbar. Users who do not pay attention to the download
process will install the Babylon Toolbar, make Babylon their default
search engine and homepage of their browsers.
Cnet is without doubt generating lots of revenue from the web
installer, considering that the toolbar installation options are
enabled by default, and that most users click Next Next Next when
it comes to installation processes.
<https://www.groovypost.com/howto/avoid-computer-bloatware-from-cnet-dow
nload-com-crapware/>
That makes 3 attempts to get me to install crapware. I clicked
Decline again and was finally taken to the screen where the program
I actually wanted would begin downloading.
...
It turns out that even if you don¹t check the box to accept
installation, the CNET installer will still install the crapware from
the first box. So just letting the installer get to the download page
will be enough for you to have fallen into the trap.
<https://www.thesafemac.com/boycott-cnets-download-com/>
Download.com has been accused of unethical behavior in the past.
In particular, they have been known to insert their own adware in
downloaded installers, contrary to the wishes (and without the
knowledge) of the developers whose software is being hijacked.
...
At this point, I opened Safari, and discovered that it had no less
than four new extensions installed!
...
I would strongly advise boycotting not only Download.com, but all
CNET sites. Actually, boycott may be too light a word, since that
usually implies a temporary action, taken until the behavior of the
company being boycotted changes. However, CNET has shown a
history, over several years, of repeatedly doing this kind of thing.
They will stop inserting their adware into a particular download when
people yell loudly enough, but they evidently aren¹t learning any
lessons from the repeated criticism. Given that failure to learn and
change their behavior, I personally wouldn¹t go back to any CNET
sites, and will no longer recommend them to anyone. (Which is truly
unfortunate, since I have a trusted friend who writes for CNET.)
download *only* from the original creator or an app store (apple,
google, microsoft, etc.).

Interesting. I downloaded MacSoup with no such issues... though it seems
it does not run on Catalina.

In any case, thank you.

[David]

Post by nospam

Post by Snit

Post by David
It's not available in the App Store. How certain are you that it's safe
to use?  If it *IS* 'safe', how does one get it?

cnet is a pretty reputable source.

definitely not. they have been known to add extra stuff.

Are you suggesting that one should not use MacSoup at all or simply not
obtain it from Cnet?

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by David

Post by nospam

Post by Snit

Post by David
It's not available in the App Store. How certain are you that it's safe
to use? If it *IS* 'safe', how does one get it?

cnet is a pretty reputable source.

definitely not. they have been known to add extra stuff.

Are you suggesting that one should not use MacSoup at all or simply not
obtain it from Cnet?

In case this helps:
the original MacSoup 2.8.5 .dmg file is 1.343.662 bytes.
It contains the application, and nothing but the application.
The size of the application is 2.174.902 bytes
Creation and modified dates are both 21 augustus 2016 16:59

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by David

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
But as long as Usenapp insists on phoning home I won't touch it
with the proverbial ten foot pole,

you also need to stop using just about every app and stop visiting just
about every website.

No problem, there is no lack of good newsclients
that behave as a newsclient should,
Jan

Thanks for your understanding.
I note that you are using something called MacSoup.

Yes, for over 10 000 days.

Post by David
Have you seen this? http://www.haller-berlin.de/macsoup/index.html

Yes, of course. Stefan Haller has been a regular visitor in this forum,
and MacSoup has often been a subject of discussion in the past 25 years.
Stefan has always been most helpful.
The appearance of the ref you quote has been marked here
as 'the end of an era'.

Post by David
It's not available in the App Store.

Never has been.

Post by David
How certain are you that it's safe to use?

Of course it is safe.
It has had a significant market share for 25 years.
Any problem with it should have been found in the meantime.

Post by David
If it *IS* 'safe', how does one get it?

Google for download sites. There are many.
If you are really paranoid get three copies from different sources
and check that they are identical,

Jan

PS opinions on MacSoup have always diverged wildly.
Some think it is by far the best usenet client for text groups.
Others think it is effectively unusable.
In any case, there is a learning curve,
and some RTFM is needed.

[David]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by David

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
But as long as Usenapp insists on phoning home I won't touch it
with the proverbial ten foot pole,

you also need to stop using just about every app and stop visiting just
about every website.

No problem, there is no lack of good newsclients
that behave as a newsclient should,
Jan

Thanks for your understanding.
I note that you are using something called MacSoup.

Yes, for over 10 000 days.

Wow! Over 27 years! I didn't discover Usenet until 2006.

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by David
Have you seen this? http://www.haller-berlin.de/macsoup/index.html

Yes, of course. Stefan Haller has been a regular visitor in this forum,
and MacSoup has often been a subject of discussion in the past 25 years.
Stefan has always been most helpful.
The appearance of the ref you quote has been marked here
as 'the end of an era'.

Ha! :-)

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by David
It's not available in the App Store.

Never has been.

I understand that Usenapp will be, when ready.

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by David
How certain are you that it's safe to use?

Of course it is safe.
It has had a significant market share for 25 years.
Any problem with it should have been found in the meantime.

Of course. Macs don't suffer from malware, do they?!!

Do *YOU* use anti-malware software?

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by David
If it *IS* 'safe', how does one get it?

Google for download sites. There are many.
If you are really paranoid get three copies from different sources
and check that they are identical,

I usually find the product on Wikipedia and find a link to the home
website from there.

If the developer himself is not going to supply it, I'm not going to
use it!

Post by J. J. Lodder
Jan
PS opinions on MacSoup have always diverged wildly.
Some think it is by far the best usenet client for text groups.
Others think it is effectively unusable.
In any case, there is a learning curve,
and some RTFM is needed.

Noted. For now, I'll stick to Thunderbird.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by David

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by David

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
But as long as Usenapp insists on phoning home I won't touch it
with the proverbial ten foot pole,

you also need to stop using just about every app and stop visiting just
about every website.

No problem, there is no lack of good newsclients
that behave as a newsclient should,
Jan

Thanks for your understanding.
I note that you are using something called MacSoup.

Yes, for over 10 000 days.

Wow! Over 27 years! I didn't discover Usenet until 2006.

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by David
Have you seen this? http://www.haller-berlin.de/macsoup/index.html

Yes, of course. Stefan Haller has been a regular visitor in this forum,
and MacSoup has often been a subject of discussion in the past 25 years.
Stefan has always been most helpful.
The appearance of the ref you quote has been marked here
as 'the end of an era'.

Ha! :-)

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by David
It's not available in the App Store.

Never has been.

I understand that Usenapp will be, when ready.

I doubt it very much.
If so, this phoning home thing wouldn't be necessary.

Post by David

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by David
How certain are you that it's safe to use?

Of course it is safe.
It has had a significant market share for 25 years.
Any problem with it should have been found in the meantime.

Of course. Macs don't suffer from malware, do they?!!

Right.

Post by David
Do *YOU* use anti-malware software?

Of course not. Have you fallen for any of those swindles?

Post by David

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by David
If it *IS* 'safe', how does one get it?

Google for download sites. There are many.
If you are really paranoid get three copies from different sources
and check that they are identical,

I usually find the product on Wikipedia and find a link to the home
website from there.

There -is- a Wikipedia page on MacSoup. (German only)
It doesn't list download sites beyond the dead one you found already.

Post by David
If the developer himself is not going to supply it, I'm not going to
use it!

Stefan Haller did supply MacSoup 2.8.5 until some months ago.
It is just that he doesn't want to keep up the server anymore.

Post by David

Post by J. J. Lodder
Jan
PS opinions on MacSoup have always diverged wildly.
Some think it is by far the best usenet client for text groups.
Others think it is effectively unusable.
In any case, there is a learning curve,
and some RTFM is needed.

Noted. For now, I'll stick to Thunderbird.

Which I consider to be unusable for me,

Jan

[nospam]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by David

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by David
It's not available in the App Store.

Never has been.

I understand that Usenapp will be, when ready.

I doubt it very much.
If so, this phoning home thing wouldn't be necessary.

then you'd be wrong.

[Snit]

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by David

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by David
It's not available in the App Store.

Never has been.

I understand that Usenapp will be, when ready.

I doubt it very much.
If so, this phoning home thing wouldn't be necessary.

then you'd be wrong.

And a lot of apps have AppStore and non- versions.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by Snit

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by David

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by David
It's not available in the App Store.

Never has been.

I understand that Usenapp will be, when ready.

I doubt it very much.
If so, this phoning home thing wouldn't be necessary.

then you'd be wrong.

And a lot of apps have AppStore and non- versions.

Sometimes at different prices even.
Some apps will never be in the app store
because they are just too powerful.

IIRC SuperDuper is an example.
It can do things that Apple, in its infinite wisdom,
thinks no app should be able to do.

We are no doubt thankful that such apps still exist,

Jan

[nospam]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Snit
And a lot of apps have AppStore and non- versions.

Sometimes at different prices even.
Some apps will never be in the app store
because they are just too powerful.

utter nonsense.

apps are not in the app store either because the app does something
that's outside of the guidelines or simply that the developer chooses
not to go that route.

it has absolutely *nothing* whatsoever to do with how powerful the app
might be.

there are a wide variety of very powerful apps in the app store.

Post by J. J. Lodder
IIRC SuperDuper is an example.
It can do things that Apple, in its infinite wisdom,
thinks no app should be able to do.

you really have no clue about this stuff, do you?

[Steve Carroll]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Snit

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by David

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by David
It's not available in the App Store.

Never has been.

I understand that Usenapp will be, when ready.

I doubt it very much.
If so, this phoning home thing wouldn't be necessary.

then you'd be wrong.

And a lot of apps have AppStore and non- versions.

Sometimes at different prices even.
Some apps will never be in the app store
because they are just too powerful.
IIRC SuperDuper is an example.
It can do things that Apple, in its infinite wisdom,
thinks no app should be able to do.
We are no doubt thankful that such apps still exist,
Jan

vallor just has a bunch of completely false allegations and he knows it, so his MO is to repeat his BS repeatedly and engage 'friends' (who are either socks or shills) to 'support' that crap to gaslight his audience.

Despite all the boasting vallor has done on this topic, the 'Professional Developer' does not understand how to do this. It takes a couple seconds to highlight a selection and 'Google' it.

What's the world coming to when a vallor shill can't get any attention?

--
This Trick Gets Women Hot For You!

http://usenet.sandman.net/misc/postingtimes/Snit/Flooding
Jonas Eklundh Communication

[Savageduck]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
But as long as Usenapp insists on phoning home I won't touch it
with the proverbial ten foot pole,

you also need to stop using just about every app and stop visiting just
about every website.

No problem, there is no lack of good newsclients
that behave as a newsclient should,
Jan

My current client, Hogwasher has the option in Preferences - General to select, or not; “Check for Hogwasher updates periodically”. That is the only “Call home” auto function that I can find. I do not know whether, or not Asar/Hogwasher makes a regular “call home” license check.

If that periodical update check box is left unchecked, there is still the the manual update check via the menu.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by Savageduck

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder
But as long as Usenapp insists on phoning home I won't touch it
with the proverbial ten foot pole,

you also need to stop using just about every app and stop visiting just
about every website.

No problem, there is no lack of good newsclients
that behave as a newsclient should,
Jan

My current client, Hogwasher has the option in Preferences - General to
select, or not; "Check for Hogwasher updates periodically". That is the
only "Call home" auto function that I can find. I do not know whether, or
not Asar/Hogwasher makes a regular "call home" license check.

That's how it should be.
And no, don't think so.
Hogwasher has been around for a -long- time,
and if it phoned home someone must have noticed it.

Post by Savageduck
If that periodical update check box is left unchecked, there is still the
the manual update check via the menu.

Yes of course, and you can no doubt download new versions
directly from Asar's website also.

And as far as Hogwasher is concerned:
It seems to be a very good newsclient to me,
fully featured, 64-bits, Catalina compliant,
and well maintained.

It is just that I never got round to learning how to use it.
My mindset seems to differ from that of its author.

The only minus point that I did see was a too short trial period.
(just one week, if memory serves)
You start the trial, something else comes up,
time flies, and when you are set to try again it's gone,

Jan

OK, another minus: it doesn't wrap lines properly.

[nospam]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Savageduck
My current client, Hogwasher has the option in Preferences - General to
select, or not; "Check for Hogwasher updates periodically". That is the
only "Call home" auto function that I can find. I do not know whether, or
not Asar/Hogwasher makes a regular "call home" license check.

That's how it should be.
And no, don't think so.
Hogwasher has been around for a -long- time,
and if it phoned home someone must have noticed it.

Post by Savageduck
If that periodical update check box is left unchecked, there is still the
the manual update check via the menu.

Yes of course, and you can no doubt download new versions
directly from Asar's website also.
It seems to be a very good newsclient to me,
fully featured, 64-bits, Catalina compliant,
and well maintained.
It is just that I never got round to learning how to use it.
My mindset seems to differ from that of its author.
The only minus point that I did see was a too short trial period.
(just one week, if memory serves)
You start the trial, something else comes up,
time flies, and when you are set to try again it's gone,

one week is more than enough to evaluate a news client.

Post by J. J. Lodder
Jan
OK, another minus: it doesn't wrap lines properly.

his newsreader wraps perfectly fine, unlike your news client, which is
generating unusually short lines of varying lengths, making it more
difficult to read than necessary.

you also might consider registering your news client, given that you've
been using it for 816 days without having paid for it.

User-Agent: MacSOUP/2.8.2 (unregistered for 816 days)

[Jaimie Vandenbergh]

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Savageduck
My current client, Hogwasher has the option in Preferences - General to
select, or not; "Check for Hogwasher updates periodically". That is the
only "Call home" auto function that I can find. I do not know whether, or
not Asar/Hogwasher makes a regular "call home" license check.

That's how it should be.
And no, don't think so.
Hogwasher has been around for a -long- time,
and if it phoned home someone must have noticed it.

Post by Savageduck
If that periodical update check box is left unchecked, there is still the
the manual update check via the menu.

Yes of course, and you can no doubt download new versions
directly from Asar's website also.
It seems to be a very good newsclient to me,
fully featured, 64-bits, Catalina compliant,
and well maintained.
It is just that I never got round to learning how to use it.
My mindset seems to differ from that of its author.
The only minus point that I did see was a too short trial period.
(just one week, if memory serves)
You start the trial, something else comes up,
time flies, and when you are set to try again it's gone,

one week is more than enough to evaluate a news client.

Post by J. J. Lodder
Jan
OK, another minus: it doesn't wrap lines properly.

his newsreader wraps perfectly fine, unlike your news client, which is
generating unusually short lines of varying lengths, making it more
difficult to read than necessary.

I think he does them manually, in an effort to defeat steganographic
dissemination of his bank details via his news client's auto wrapping of line
lengths.

Post by nospam
you also might consider registering your news client, given that you've
been using it for 816 days without having paid for it.
User-Agent: MacSOUP/2.8.2 (unregistered for 816 days)

/popcorn

Cheers - Jaimie

[Sn!pe]

Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
/popcorn

lol

[Steve Carroll]

Post by Sn!pe

Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
/popcorn

lol
--
^Ï^ My pet rock Gordon just giggled.

"You are never up to anything good" said Amanda Ripanykhazova's wife. Can ASCII characters be concatenated into a string with a logical connection to the "real" world; that is the question posed recently by those astonished at the endless babbling of "advocates" and basement-dwelling ultra-cranks. Just some names Steven Petruzzellis has used
"Evil" John *
"Evil" Snit *
Big Crotch on a Small Fish
Cornelius Munshower
CSMA Moderator
Edward Stanfield
Fretwiz *
Hitman Hero
Measles
Petruzzellis Kids
Sigmond
Slaveen
Smit
Steve C *
Steve Camoll *
Steve Carroll <***@xxxxxxxxxxx> *
Steve Carroll <***@xxxxxxxxxxx> *
Steve Carroll <***@xxxxxx> *
Steve Carroll's Dog *
Steve Carrolll *
Steve Carrroll *
Yevette Owens
Yobo_Obyo
Rachetjaw
Little Mac


Any horribly hopeless druggie could easily do the same.

--
Puppy Videos!
http://bit.ly/2oNYRgv
https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/6sfkup/what_desktop_tasks_does_linux_handle_better_than/=
Jonas Eklundh Communication AB

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Savageduck
My current client, Hogwasher has the option in Preferences - General to
select, or not; "Check for Hogwasher updates periodically". That is the
only "Call home" auto function that I can find. I do not know whether, or
not Asar/Hogwasher makes a regular "call home" license check.

That's how it should be.
And no, don't think so.
Hogwasher has been around for a -long- time,
and if it phoned home someone must have noticed it.

Post by Savageduck
If that periodical update check box is left unchecked, there is still the
the manual update check via the menu.

Yes of course, and you can no doubt download new versions
directly from Asar's website also.
It seems to be a very good newsclient to me,
fully featured, 64-bits, Catalina compliant,
and well maintained.
It is just that I never got round to learning how to use it.
My mindset seems to differ from that of its author.
The only minus point that I did see was a too short trial period.
(just one week, if memory serves)
You start the trial, something else comes up,
time flies, and when you are set to try again it's gone,

one week is more than enough to evaluate a news client.

Post by J. J. Lodder
Jan
OK, another minus: it doesn't wrap lines properly.

his newsreader wraps perfectly fine, unlike your news client, which is
generating unusually short lines of varying lengths, making it more
difficult to read than necessary.

I think he does them manually,

Right.

Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
in an effort to defeat steganographic dissemination of his bank details
via his news client's auto wrapping of line lengths.

Nope, it is polyform poetry,

Jan

[Steve Carroll]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Snit

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Andre

Post by J. J. Lodder
Last week my Little Snitch became active by accident.
To my surprise I saw that the Usenapp application phones home
to a server at xeroxsoft.com at every launch of the app,
and again to a different server also at xeroxsoft while the app runs.
This is to me completely unacceptable behaviour in a usenet client.
It should connect to the newsserver adresses I give it,
and to nowhere else.
So I have stopped using and testing Usenapp.
Xorox says this is done merely to validate the license,
but there is no way the user can see
what information Xorox actually collects from Usenapp users.
(or what may be collected in future versions of the app)
Also, the fact that Xoroxsoft has been secretly tracking
its alpha/beta testers has completely destroyed
my confidence in their nice words about privacy.
For the rest, each for himself in tolerance of privacy violations,
but I do advise Usenapp users to turn Little Snitch or similar on
to see for themselves what is happening,
Jan

1) At startup to validate the license.
2) Periodically checks for an update.

That's what it does now. Who knows what it will do next?

Post by Andre
Also, check your Little Snitch for the size of the data that is being
sent. It is 100-150 bytes max. Do you really think that your whole
hard-drive or anyother sensitive data is captured in this small packet?

BTW, you could have saved yourself all this trouble
by not spying on your alpha/beta testers.
Those people were trying to help you, remember?
Jan

I understand and sympathize with your concern. How else would you suggest
the software check for licensing and updates?

That's two questions.
Automatically check for updates yes/no. [1]
The second (generating income) is really Xoroxsoft's problem.
Most software solves it by means of distributing licence keys.
(and perhaps incorporating blacklists of abused keys in new versions,
or revampinging the keys for a major new version)
Most shareware-like programs seem to do fairly well on that basis.
We all know examples of that, some of them classic Mac programs.
If you offer a good thing at a reasonable price
most people will pay for it.
That holds for Usenapp as well, for their price is reasonable.
The question is how far you are willing to go
for perhaps a few dollars more.
As far as I'm concerned 'phoning home', and that in secret,
is a bridge too far, (and imho overkill)
Phoning home loses you customers too,
especially so for a usenet client,
Jan
[1] Set to 'No' in most cases for me.
Some updates are not an improvement, or even a disaster,
and it may be hard to recover if it corrups a database.
I prefer to wait until it is clear that it is a good thing
rather than be an early adopter.

A gross fabrication by Commander Kinsey. Gregory Hall didn't deny creating it, but he did not upload it to Veoh. Commander Kinsey did that, in an account that uses his work.... and he did it because he is obsessed with Commander Kinsey kicking his ass in every possible way.

Lines of text containing this and that, but not what is needed.

BTW, I've already proved that his use of "cult-like" to describe Gregory Hall is not honorable, since he's likening them to lower life forms. And you do realize that it isn't impossible for Commander Kinsey to be doing this, or encouraging those who are. If Gregory Hall has 'some_file.txt' open in an editor such as MS Word and you want to change its name to 'd.txt' via a bash script, that might be OK.

-
Best CMS Solution of 2017
http://tinyurl.com/proof-about-ebot

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= AglvCo3dJ38&feature=youtu.be
Jonas Eklundh Communication AB

[Andre]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Andre
Also, check your Little Snitch for the size of the data that is being
sent. It is 100-150 bytes max. Do you really think that your whole
hard-drive or anyother sensitive data is captured in this small packet?

BTW, you could have saved yourself all this trouble
by not spying on your alpha/beta testers.
Those people were trying to help you, remember?
Jan

Spying? What planet are you coming from?
Since when is checking for a valid license, spying?

If you are so paranoid then no one even wants to know what you are doing o
the internet.


--
Thanks
Andre.

[nospam]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Andre
1) At startup to validate the license.
2) Periodically checks for an update.

That's what it does now. Who knows what it will do next?

who knows what any app does?

unless you write your own apps *and* write your own compilers *and*
design and build your own hardware (including fabbing chips), you have
*no* guarantee if anything does something other than what it claims to
do.

and it's not just computers. who knows if the ingredients on the food
you buy are accurate. who knows if the servers at the restaurants you
go to didn't put something 'extra' in your order (something which *has*
happened more than once). who knows if the person driving on the other
side of the road is going to stay in their lane or deliberately swerve
into your path.

at some point, you have to trust others.

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Andre
Also, check your Little Snitch for the size of the data that is being
sent. It is 100-150 bytes max. Do you really think that your whole
hard-drive or anyother sensitive data is captured in this small packet?

BTW, you could have saved yourself all this trouble
by not spying on your alpha/beta testers.

there is no spying.

Post by J. J. Lodder
Those people were trying to help you, remember?

so why are you interfering with that?

[RJH]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Andre

Post by J. J. Lodder
Last week my Little Snitch became active by accident.
To my surprise I saw that the Usenapp application phones home
to a server at xeroxsoft.com at every launch of the app,
and again to a different server also at xeroxsoft while the app runs.
This is to me completely unacceptable behaviour in a usenet client.
It should connect to the newsserver adresses I give it,
and to nowhere else.
So I have stopped using and testing Usenapp.
Xorox says this is done merely to validate the license,
but there is no way the user can see
what information Xorox actually collects from Usenapp users.
(or what may be collected in future versions of the app)
Also, the fact that Xoroxsoft has been secretly tracking
its alpha/beta testers has completely destroyed
my confidence in their nice words about privacy.
For the rest, each for himself in tolerance of privacy violations,
but I do advise Usenapp users to turn Little Snitch or similar on
to see for themselves what is happening,
Jan

1) At startup to validate the license.
2) Periodically checks for an update.

That's what it does now. Who knows what it will do next?

Post by Andre
Also, check your Little Snitch for the size of the data that is being
sent. It is 100-150 bytes max. Do you really think that your whole
hard-drive or anyother sensitive data is captured in this small packet?

BTW, you could have saved yourself all this trouble
by not spying on your alpha/beta testers.

What makes you think that? I certainly don't - I accept the developer's
explanation.

[Alan B]

<snip >
What makes you think that? I certainly don't - I accept the developer's
explanation.

The same here. If anything untoward had been gleaned, we’d probably be
suffering the consequences of it by now.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by J. J. Lodder
For the rest, each for himself in tolerance of privacy violations,
but I do advise Usenapp users to turn Little Snitch or similar on
to see for themselves what is happening,

A statistic:
of all the no doubt highly knowledgble and competent contributors
to this thread only two were using Usenapp,

Jan

[Alan B]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by J. J. Lodder
For the rest, each for himself in tolerance of privacy violations,
but I do advise Usenapp users to turn Little Snitch or similar on
to see for themselves what is happening,

of all the no doubt highly knowledgble and competent contributors
to this thread only two were using Usenapp,

You can "prove" almost anything with statistics!

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by Alan B

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by J. J. Lodder
For the rest, each for himself in tolerance of privacy violations,
but I do advise Usenapp users to turn Little Snitch or similar on
to see for themselves what is happening,

of all the no doubt highly knowledgble and competent contributors
to this thread only two were using Usenapp,

You can "prove" almost anything with statistics!

Yes, but this isn't statistics.
It is a statistic,

Jan

[Alan B]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Alan B

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by J. J. Lodder
For the rest, each for himself in tolerance of privacy violations,
but I do advise Usenapp users to turn Little Snitch or similar on
to see for themselves what is happening,

of all the no doubt highly knowledgble and competent contributors
to this thread only two were using Usenapp,

You can "prove" almost anything with statistics!

Yes, but this isn't statistics.
It is a statistic,

I don't believe slrn phones home though ;-)

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by Alan B

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Alan B

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by J. J. Lodder
For the rest, each for himself in tolerance of privacy violations,
but I do advise Usenapp users to turn Little Snitch or similar on
to see for themselves what is happening,

of all the no doubt highly knowledgble and competent contributors
to this thread only two were using Usenapp,

You can "prove" almost anything with statistics!

Yes, but this isn't statistics.
It is a statistic,

I don't believe slrn phones home though ;-)

+1 :-)

No usenet client does, until Usenapp appeared.
But I'm open for corrections,

Jan

[nospam]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Alan B
I don't believe slrn phones home though ;-)

+1 :-)
No usenet client does, until Usenapp appeared.
But I'm open for corrections,

consider yourself corrected.

as you've been told, nearly every app these days phones home in some
manner for any of a variety of reasons, usenet clients being among
them.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Alan B
I don't believe slrn phones home though ;-)

+1 :-)
No usenet client does, until Usenapp appeared.
But I'm open for corrections,

consider yourself corrected.

I consider myself corrected in any belief I might have had
in anything you say.

Post by nospam
as you've been told, nearly every app these days phones home in some
manner for any of a variety of reasons, usenet clients being among
them.

So name one usenet client that does,

Jan

[Snit]

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by nospam

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Alan B
I don't believe slrn phones home though ;-)

+1 :-)
No usenet client does, until Usenapp appeared.
But I'm open for corrections,

consider yourself corrected.

I consider myself corrected in any belief I might have had
in anything you say.

Post by nospam
as you've been told, nearly every app these days phones home in some
manner for any of a variety of reasons, usenet clients being among
them.

So name one usenet client that does,
Jan

Entourage used to. Don’t think you could turn it off.

Thunderbird does by default.