Although the Usenet has gained in popularity within recent years, it still remains unknown to many. No wonder, because the birth of the Usenet was already thirty years ago, even before the spread of the World Wide Web. In 1979, the three students Tom Truscott, Steve Bellovin and Jim Ellis came up with the idea of connecting two university computers. In the following years the size of the network reached already several thousand computers and people all around the world discussed lively about any imaginable topic. From sports up to political debates, you can find thousands of discussions in the Usenet and you are free to join them if you want to.

But then the internet became popular and began to compete with the Usenet. Web forums offered a more user friendly environment for discussions than the newsgroups. While the beginning of the 90s brought with it a big rise of Usenet users, the end of the 90s saw a big drop. The number of news postings decreased drastically.

This changed with the advent of high speed internet connections. New users discovered the possibilities offered by the Usenet. Its decentralized network architecture ensures high download speeds and so binary newsgroups (newsgroups which include text-documents and files) gained popularity. Any type of file can be posted and downloaded from these newsgroups. Usually these files are fragmented and so only available in a compressed format (e. g. Rar-Files).

However, because of the enormous amount of topics discussed in the Usenet, structure could become an issue. Therefore the Usenet is structured hierarchically. The top hierarchies, the so called “Big Eight” are “comp.” (computer-related discussions), “humanities.” (humanities topics), “misc.“ (miscellaneous topics), “news.” (newsgroup-related matters), “rec.” (recreation and entertainment), “sci.“ (science-related discussions), “soc.“ (social discussions), “talk.” (general “off-topic discussions). Another big hierarchy is the “alt.”-category which includes the popular binaries mentioned above.

However, the posts inside the Usenet aren’t there forever, as they are subject to a so called “retention time”. Since each newsgroup is allocated a limited amount of storage every time a new post is made, an old one will be deleted in order to provide enough room for fresh content. The offered retention time varies among Usenet providers from 400 up to 1000 days.

Unfortunately, the access to the Usenet has been limited. Nowadays, it is recommendable to sign up with commercial Usenet-provider like UseNeXT. Additionally to providing access to Usenet, the providers offer their own special Usenet software. Without this software you aren’t able to download files from within the Usenet. Because of the quantity and the offers of providers differ significantly, you should carefully compare them and choose the one which is best for you. The providers distinguish themselves especially in price, download capacity, software and retention time.

We had earlier told about the Mobile Tower Sealing issue, now High Court has givem a major relief to cell phone users and service providers, the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court has directed NOIDA authority to open the seal of over 100 mobile towers immediately.

A division bench comprising Justice Pradeep Kant and Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi directed completion of formalities pertaining to setting up of towers by the mobile companies within two months.

In its order yesterday on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition filed by Indus Towers Company, whose services are used by cellular service providers in the satellite town on the outskirts of Delhi, the court asked the petitioner to approach the authority with necessary documents for fulfilling the formalities for installing the mobile towers.

Mobile services in Noida remained badly crippled for the second day running as the authorities launched a crackdown on “illegal” mobile towers. Already 193 of 576 towers have been sealed, leading to mobile phones going on the blink, especially in residential sectors 29-35 and industrial sectors 2-12.

What’s more, a similar crackdown has started in Delhi. Already, 40 mobile towers have been sealed in the city and more “illegal” towers are in MCD’s crosshairs. Delhi has 4,532 mobile towers, out of which MCD reckons 2,517 towers are illegal. So, if these are sealed, mobile phone services in the city will be very badly hit.

The faceoff between the authorities and mobile service providers could escalate as neither side is backing down. While Noida authorities as well as MCD are insisting on the towers meeting all norms, which they claim many don’t, the service providers’ body, COAI, is maintaining that since regulator, TRAI, is all set to come out with a consultation paper on tower installation, status quo should be maintained.

Meanwhile, mobile phone users are feeling the heat. Said Rahul Sinha, a resident of Noida sector 11: “People are helpless without their mobile phones. It’s for many their connection with the world. We have a wedding in our house on February 16, but with no network coverage, we were unable to plan anything.” Similar sentiments were echoed by many more residents.

In Delhi, MCD commissioner K S Mehra said that action against all illegal towers will follow. When asked about illegal towers, a COAI spokesman said, “There are no illegal towers in Delhi. What MCD is calling illegal are applications filed by service providers that are pending with MCD.” In short, the two positions are at variance, indicating a prolonged confrontation, unless higher authorities step in.

Both MCD and Noida authorities want all cellphone towers to have structural stability certificates, an NOC from resident welfare associations, design approval from experts, clearance from the pollution board, fire department and a security fee of Rs 1 lakh per tower. Above all, they want the towers to be moved out of residential areas to commercial areas, government buildings and community service buildings like `baraat ghars’.

At present, most towers are in residential areas. Relocating them is bound to create a major dislocation of service, unless the whole operation is undertaken jointly by authorities and service providers.

MCD has already set up a sub-committee, headed by councillor Meera Agarwal, which is holding talks with RWAs. It has also written to the World Health Organisation to ascertain the health risk posed by the towers. It’s said the towers don’t just pollute when run on gensets, but also radiate waves that could be harmful. WHO has said that it still has no data to reach any conclusion on health risks.

Source: TOI