Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > news.admin.hierarchies > #2638 > unrolled thread

Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial Intelligence

Back to article view | Back to news.admin.hierarchies

Contents

  Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial Intelligence Bingo3331 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2025-03-30 23:29 +0000
    Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial Intelligence D <J@M> - 2025-03-31 04:15 +0200
      Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial   Intelligence Bingo3331 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2025-04-01 15:10 +0000
        Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial Intelligence D <J@M> - 2025-04-01 18:19 +0200
          Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial   Intelligence Bingo3331 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2025-04-01 17:41 +0000
            Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial Intelligence D <J@M> - 2025-04-02 17:30 +0200
    Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial Intelligence Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-03-31 08:47 +0100
      Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial Intelligence Bingo3331 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2025-04-01 17:09 +0000
        Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial Intelligence Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-04-01 19:18 +0100
    Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial Intelligence Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-03-31 19:42 +0200
      Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial   Intelligence Bingo3331 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2025-04-01 17:26 +0000
        Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial   Intelligence Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-04-01 20:00 +0200
    Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial Intelligence Julien ÉLIE <iulius@nom-de-mon-site.com.invalid> - 2025-04-01 17:38 +0200
      Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial   Intelligence Bingo3331 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2025-04-01 16:48 +0000
        Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial Intelligence Julien ÉLIE <iulius@nom-de-mon-site.com.invalid> - 2025-04-01 21:34 +0200
          Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial Intelligence Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-04-02 09:14 +0200
          Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial   Intelligence Bingo3331 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2025-04-04 17:17 +0000
            Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial   Intelligence "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> - 2025-04-04 18:07 +0000
    Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial Intelligence David LaRue <huey.dll@tampabay.rr.com> - 2025-08-02 18:17 +0000
      Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial Intelligence Chris Jacobs <ctjacobs@ziggo.nl.invalid> - 2025-08-02 20:31 +0200
    Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial Intelligence Chris Jacobs <ctjacobs@ziggo.nl.invalid> - 2025-08-02 20:25 +0200

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#2638 — Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial Intelligence

### **Request for Discussion: Creation of the ai.* Hierarchy**

We, Bingo3331 and Corrado Roberto, are excited to propose the establishment
 of `ai.*` as a new top-level hierarchy on Usenet, dedicated to artificial
 intelligence (AI)—a transformative field that deserves a prominent and
 dedicated space in our network. Initially, the hierarchy will host
 Italian-language groups under `ai.ita.*`, but it is designed to be scalable
 and accommodate international communities in the future (e.g., `ai.eng.*`,
 `ai.fr.*`). Below, we outline the details and the compelling benefits for
 the Usenet community.

---

### **Proposed Initial Groups**
1. **ai.ita.general**  
   Charter: "General discussions on artificial intelligence. Primary
 language: Italian. English posts welcome. Text-only, no binaries."  

2. **ai.ita.chatgpt**  
   Charter: "Discussions on ChatGPT: news, uses, and developments. Primary
 language: Italian. English posts welcome. Text-only." 
 
3. **ai.ita.deepseek**  
   Charter: "Discussions on DeepSeek: news and applications. Primary
 language: Italian. English posts permitted. Text-only."  

4. **ai.ita.grok**  
   Charter: "Discussions on Grok: updates and usage. Primary language:
 Italian.
 English posts welcome. Text-only."  

5. **ai.ita.image-gen**  
   Charter: "Discussions on AI image generators (e.g., Midjourney, DALL-E).
 Primary language: Italian. English posts welcome. Text-only, no binaries." 
 

6. **ai.ita.video-gen**  
   Charter: "Discussions on AI video and film generators (e.g., Sora).
 Primary language: Italian. English posts welcome. Text-only, no binaries." 
 

7. **ai.ita.stats**  
   Charter: "Statistics and analysis of ai.ita.* group usage: users, posts,
 trends. Primary language: Italian. English posts welcome. Text-only."

---

### **Why ai.* as a Top-Level Hierarchy?**

#### **1. AI is a Globally Significant Topic**
Artificial intelligence is reshaping technology and society—from chatbots
 like ChatGPT and Grok to multimedia generators. Usenet, with its rich
 history of technical discourse (e.g., `comp.*`, `sci.*`), is the perfect
 platform for a dedicated AI hierarchy. While `comp.ai.*` exists, it is
 outdated and underutilized, failing to capture the breadth and dynamism of
 modern AI. `ai.*` fills this gap with a forward-looking approach.

#### **2. Scalable and Inclusive Design**
Unlike a sub-hierarchy such as `alt.ai.*`, a top-level `ai.*` provides a
 robust foundation for growth. We begin with `ai.ita.*` to serve the vibrant
 Italian Usenet community—already active in `it.*`—but the structure
 supports future expansion to other languages (e.g., `ai.eng.*`, `ai.de.*`)
 or sub-topics (e.g., `ai.ethics.*`, `ai.tools.*`). This scalability ensures
 `ai.*` can evolve with the field.

#### **3. Revitalizing Usenet**
Usenet has seen declining participation. A modern, high-profile hierarchy
 like `ai.*`, focused on a trending topic, can attract both seasoned users
 and newcomers fascinated by AI. The bilingual approach of `ai.ita.*`
 (Italian primary, English welcome) bridges local and global communities,
 boosting engagement across borders.

#### **4. Alignment with Existing Hierarchies**
`ai.*` fits naturally alongside top-level hierarchies like `comp.*`
 (computers), `sci.*` (science), and `rec.*` (recreation) as a distinct
 thematic domain. It’s not a miscellaneous experiment suited for `alt.*`,
 but a deliberate, structured proposal with clear purpose and growth
 potential.

#### **5. Operational Simplicity**
The proposed groups are text-only, aligning with the capabilities of most
 Usenet servers. The inclusion of `ai.ita.stats` offers a practical tool to
 monitor activity and optimize the hierarchy, preventing the proliferation
 of empty or redundant groups—a common issue elsewhere.

---

### **Request to Admins**
We, Bingo3331 and Corrado Roberto, respectfully ask news server
 administrators to:
1. **Propagate the ai.* Hierarchy**: Add `ai.*` to your `active` and
 `newsgroups` files, starting with the `ai.ita.*` groups listed above. This
 will ensure AI discussions reach a global audience.

2. **Forward Control Messages**: Support the PGP-signed `newgroup` and
 `checkgroups` messages we will issue to create and maintain these groups.
 Corrado Roberto’s PGP key (active since 1998) is available for
 verification.

3. **Establish Peering**: Collaborate with us to set up peering agreements,
 particularly with Italian servers (e.g., `it.*`) and major international
 ones (e.g., Eternal September), for seamless propagation. Contact Corrado
 Roberto at <roberto@corradoroberto.it> for technical coordination.

---

### **Motivation and Appeal**
AI is not a passing trend—it’s the future of technology. Usenet can remain
 relevant by embracing `ai.*`, a hierarchy that reflects today’s innovations
 while honoring our tradition of open discussion. Let’s not confine AI to
 the catch-all chaos of `alt.*`. Instead, let’s give it the prominence it
 deserves with a top-level hierarchy that can thrive and expand.

We invite the community and admins to discuss this proposal. We’re open to
 feedback to refine the names, charters, or approach. With sufficient
 support, we’ll proceed with a Call for Votes (CFV) to formalize `ai.*`.

Thank you for your time and consideration!

Bingo3331  

Roberto Corrado
news admin of news.corradoroberto.it

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#2639

On 30 Mar 2025 23:29:03 GMT, Bingo3331 <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>### **Request for Discussion: Creation of the ai.* Hierarchy**
>We, Bingo3331 and Corrado Roberto, are excited to propose the establishment
> of `ai.*` as a new top-level hierarchy on Usenet, dedicated to artificial
> intelligence (AI) a transformative field that deserves a prominent and
> dedicated space in our network. Initially, the hierarchy will host
> Italian-language groups under `ai.ita.*`, but it is designed to be scalable
> and accommodate international communities in the future (e.g., `ai.eng.*`,
> `ai.fr.*`). Below, we outline the details and the compelling benefits for
> the Usenet community.
>---
>### **Proposed Initial Groups**
>1. **ai.ita.general**
>   Charter: "General discussions on artificial intelligence. Primary
> language: Italian. English posts welcome. Text-only, no binaries."
>2. **ai.ita.chatgpt**
>   Charter: "Discussions on ChatGPT: news, uses, and developments. Primary
> language: Italian. English posts welcome. Text-only."
>3. **ai.ita.deepseek**
>   Charter: "Discussions on DeepSeek: news and applications. Primary
> language: Italian. English posts permitted. Text-only."
>4. **ai.ita.grok**
>   Charter: "Discussions on Grok: updates and usage. Primary language:
> Italian.
> English posts welcome. Text-only."
>5. **ai.ita.image-gen**
>   Charter: "Discussions on AI image generators (e.g., Midjourney, DALL-E).
> Primary language: Italian. English posts welcome. Text-only, no binaries."
>6. **ai.ita.video-gen**
>   Charter: "Discussions on AI video and film generators (e.g., Sora).
> Primary language: Italian. English posts welcome. Text-only, no binaries."
>7. **ai.ita.stats**
>   Charter: "Statistics and analysis of ai.ita.* group usage: users, posts,
> trends. Primary language: Italian. English posts welcome. Text-only."
>---
>### **Why ai.* as a Top-Level Hierarchy?**
>#### **1. AI is a Globally Significant Topic**
>Artificial intelligence is reshaping technology and society from chatbots
> like ChatGPT and Grok to multimedia generators. Usenet, with its rich
> history of technical discourse (e.g., `comp.*`, `sci.*`), is the perfect
> platform for a dedicated AI hierarchy. While `comp.ai.*` exists, it is
> outdated and underutilized, failing to capture the breadth and dynamism of
> modern AI. `ai.*` fills this gap with a forward-looking approach.
>#### **2. Scalable and Inclusive Design**
>Unlike a sub-hierarchy such as `alt.ai.*`, a top-level `ai.*` provides a
> robust foundation for growth. We begin with `ai.ita.*` to serve the vibrant
> Italian Usenet community already active in `it.*` but the structure
> supports future expansion to other languages (e.g., `ai.eng.*`, `ai.de.*`)
> or sub-topics (e.g., `ai.ethics.*`, `ai.tools.*`). This scalability ensures
> `ai.*` can evolve with the field.
>#### **3. Revitalizing Usenet**
>Usenet has seen declining participation. A modern, high-profile hierarchy
> like `ai.*`, focused on a trending topic, can attract both seasoned users
> and newcomers fascinated by AI. The bilingual approach of `ai.ita.*`
> (Italian primary, English welcome) bridges local and global communities,
> boosting engagement across borders.
>#### **4. Alignment with Existing Hierarchies**
>`ai.*` fits naturally alongside top-level hierarchies like `comp.*`
> (computers), `sci.*` (science), and `rec.*` (recreation) as a distinct
> thematic domain. It's not a miscellaneous experiment suited for `alt.*`,
> but a deliberate, structured proposal with clear purpose and growth
> potential.
>#### **5. Operational Simplicity**
>The proposed groups are text-only, aligning with the capabilities of most
> Usenet servers. The inclusion of `ai.ita.stats` offers a practical tool to
> monitor activity and optimize the hierarchy, preventing the proliferation
> of empty or redundant groups a common issue elsewhere.
>---
>### **Request to Admins**
>We, Bingo3331 and Corrado Roberto, respectfully ask news server
> administrators to:
>1. **Propagate the ai.* Hierarchy**: Add `ai.*` to your `active` and
> `newsgroups` files, starting with the `ai.ita.*` groups listed above. This
> will ensure AI discussions reach a global audience.
>2. **Forward Control Messages**: Support the PGP-signed `newgroup` and
> `checkgroups` messages we will issue to create and maintain these groups.
> Corrado Roberto's PGP key (active since 1998) is available for
> verification.
>3. **Establish Peering**: Collaborate with us to set up peering agreements,
> particularly with Italian servers (e.g., `it.*`) and major international
> ones (e.g., Eternal September), for seamless propagation. Contact Corrado
> Roberto at <roberto@corradoroberto.it> for technical coordination.
>---
>### **Motivation and Appeal**
>AI is not a passing trend it's the future of technology. Usenet can remain
> relevant by embracing `ai.*`, a hierarchy that reflects today's innovations
> while honoring our tradition of open discussion. Let's not confine AI to
> the catch-all chaos of `alt.*`. Instead, let's give it the prominence it
> deserves with a top-level hierarchy that can thrive and expand.
>We invite the community and admins to discuss this proposal. We're open to
> feedback to refine the names, charters, or approach. With sufficient
> support, we'll proceed with a Call for Votes (CFV) to formalize `ai.*`.
>Thank you for your time and consideration!
>Bingo3331
>Roberto Corrado
>news admin of news.corradoroberto.it

"usenet has seen declining participation" seems to be a prevailing theme

many, if not most, newsgroups that might've been active decades ago have
gone silent . . . artificial anything is better than superficial nothing

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2655 — Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial Intelligence

On 31/03/25 04:15, D wrote:

>
>"usenet has seen declining participation" seems to be a prevailing theme
>
>many, if not most, newsgroups that might've been active decades ago have
>gone silent . . . artificial anything is better than superficial nothing
>

Thanks for the support!!! That is also why we will try to promote the new
 "AI*" hierarchy, and the new newsgroups outside of usenet on Reddit, and on
 the other social and thematic blogs and groups on artificial
 intelligence!!!

-- 
*Posted from
  PhoNews Pro for Android V.3.13.3
  News.individual.net*

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2659

On 1 Apr 2025 15:10:43 GMT, Bingo3331 <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>On 31/03/25 04:15, D wrote:
>>"usenet has seen declining participation" seems to be a prevailing theme
>>many, if not most, newsgroups that might've been active decades ago have
>>gone silent . . . artificial anything is better than superficial nothing
>
>Thanks for the support!!! That is also why we will try to promote the new
> "AI*" hierarchy, and the new newsgroups outside of usenet on Reddit, and on
> the other social and thematic blogs and groups on artificial
> intelligence!!!

"a.i." is certainly an intriguing theme with profound implications extending
far beyond computers, seems worthy of its own newsgroups, "sci.ai", "soc.ai"
but adding new groups or hierarchies to this quasi-dormant usenet necropolis
sounds more like an exercise in futility ... plain text usenet is old-school
which for those inclined to reading, writing, and arithmetic find preferable
to jetsetter, multimedia, always in a hurry to get somewhere fast lifestyles

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2664 — Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial Intelligence

On 01/04/25 18:19, D wrote:
>
>"a.i." is certainly an intriguing theme with profound implications extending
>far beyond computers, seems worthy of its own newsgroups, "sci.ai", "soc.ai"
>but adding new groups or hierarchies to this quasi-dormant usenet necropolis
>sounds more like an exercise in futility ... plain text usenet is old-school
>which for those inclined to reading, writing, and arithmetic find preferable
>to jetsetter, multimedia, always in a hurry to get somewhere fast lifestyles
>

We’re not asking for blind faith. Support `ai.*`, propagate the initial
 `ai.ita.*` groups, and let’s see the results. Corrado Roberto (with his
 server at gatto.corradoroberto.it) is ready to handle technical setup and
 peering, ensuring minimal burden on other admins. If the groups stay empty,
 we’ll reassess—but if they take off, Usenet gains a vibrant new hub. It’s a
 low-risk, high-reward chance to breathe life into the network.

What do you think? Could we tweak anything—names, charters, or approach—to
 address your concerns? We’d love your input to make this a win for
 everyone.

Looking forward to your thoughts!

-- 
*Posted from
  PhoNews Pro for Android V.3.13.3
  News.individual.net*

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2672

On 1 Apr 2025 17:41:04 GMT, Bingo3331 <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>On 01/04/25 18:19, D wrote:
>>"a.i." is certainly an intriguing theme with profound implications extending
>>far beyond computers, seems worthy of its own newsgroups, "sci.ai", "soc.ai"
>>but adding new groups or hierarchies to this quasi-dormant usenet necropolis
>>sounds more like an exercise in futility ... plain text usenet is old-school
>>which for those inclined to reading, writing, and arithmetic find preferable
>>to jetsetter, multimedia, always in a hurry to get somewhere fast lifestyles
>
>We're not asking for blind faith. Support `ai.*`, propagate the initial
> `ai.ita.*` groups, and let's see the results. Corrado Roberto (with his
> server at gatto.corradoroberto.it) is ready to handle technical setup and
> peering, ensuring minimal burden on other admins. If the groups stay empty,
> we'll reassess but if they take off, Usenet gains a vibrant new hub. It's a
> low-risk, high-reward chance to breathe life into the network.
>What do you think? Could we tweak anything names, charters, or approach--to
> address your concerns? We'd love your input to make this a win for
> everyone.
>Looking forward to your thoughts!

putting these two words together, "artificial" with "intelligence",
is counterintuitive to common sense . . . that's what's wrong with
it because if man could imitate whole planets, mercury for example,
it would surely become a "death star", a superweapon of the empire
humans weaponize everything they touch planet earth is militarized

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2640

Bingo3331 <invalid@invalid.com> writes:
> ### **Request for Discussion: Creation of the ai.* Hierarchy**
>
> We, Bingo3331 and Corrado Roberto, are excited to propose the establishment
> of `ai.*` as a new top-level hierarchy on Usenet, dedicated to artificial
> intelligence (AI)—a transformative field that deserves a prominent and
> dedicated space in our network. Initially, the hierarchy will host
> Italian-language groups under `ai.ita.*`, but it is designed to be scalable
> and accommodate international communities in the future (e.g., `ai.eng.*`,
> `ai.fr.*`). Below, we outline the details and the compelling benefits for
> the Usenet community.

There’s more than a dozen comp.ai groups, completely unused as far as I
can tell. It doesn’t sound like anyone’s particularly interested in
talking about AI on Usenet.

If you want Italian-language groups then surely something below it.*
would be more appropriate.

-- 
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2661

On 31/03/25 09:47, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
>
>There’s more than a dozen comp.ai groups, completely unused as far as I
>can tell. It doesn’t sound like anyone’s particularly interested in
>talking about AI on Usenet.
>
>If you want Italian-language groups then surely something below it.*
>would be more appropriate.

Thank you for your feedback on our proposal for the `ai.*` hierarchy.
Corrado Roberto and I would like to explain why we believe `ai.*` is not
 only viable but also a valuable addition to Usenet-and why we hope to earn
 your support.
You're absolutely right that there are over a dozen groups under
 `comp.ai.*`, and many appear dormant. We've observed this too-groups like
 `comp.ai.neural-nets` or `comp.ai.philosophy` have little to no activity.
 But we see this as an opportunity, not a dead end. The inactivity doesn't
 necessarily reflect a lack of interest in AI itself, but rather that these
 groups, created decades ago, no longer align with today's AI landscape.
 Modern AI-think ChatGPT, Grok, or image/video generators-has evolved far
 beyond the scope of those older groups, which focus on niche or outdated
 topics.

`ai.*` aims to refresh this space with a modern, unified hierarchy that
 reflects current trends and interests. Instead of scattering discussions
 across fragmented, inactive `comp.ai.*` groups, `ai.*` offers a clear,
 centralized hub. We're not duplicating effort; we're revitalizing it.
Your point about perceived disinterest is valid-Usenet's overall traffic has
 declined, and AI discussions here are sparse. But we believe this is a
 chicken-and-egg problem. The lack of active, relevant groups discourages
 participation. AI is a hot topic globally-on platforms like X, Reddit, and
 beyond-yet Usenet hasn't kept pace with a dedicated, modern space to
 capture that enthusiasm. 

Our proposal for `ai.ita.*` groups (e.g., `ai.ita.chatgpt`,
 `ai.ita.general`) is a deliberate test: start with the Italian community,
 which has a strong Usenet presence via `it.*`, and build momentum. We're
 already planning crossposts and promotional threads to seed activity. If
 successful, `ai.*` can expand to other languages (e.g., `ai.eng.*`). The
 inclusion of `ai.ita.stats` will let us track engagement and prove
 demand-something `comp.ai.*` never had. We're betting that a fresh
 hierarchy will spark interest where stale ones couldn't.

You suggest placing these groups under `it.*`, and it's a fair idea-after
 all, `it.*` is thriving and Italian-focused. However, we see two key
 reasons to opt for `ai.*` as a top-level hierarchy:

1. **Thematic Clarity**: `it.*` is a national hierarchy covering everything
 from `it.comp` to `it.hobby`. Nesting AI groups there (e.g.,
 `it.ai.chatgpt`) risks diluting their focus and visibility. AI is a global,
 cutting-edge field deserving its own identity, not a subcategory of a
 catch-all hierarchy. `ai.*` signals to users-Italian or not-that this is
 *the* place for AI discussions, much like `comp.*` does for computing.

2. **Scalability**: Starting with `ai.ita.*` is just the beginning. A
 top-level `ai.*` allows future growth-`ai.eng.*` for English speakers,
 `ai.fr.*` for French, etc.-without being tied to a single language or
 region. If we limit ourselves to `it.*`, we'd need separate proposals for
 each language community, fragmenting the effort. `ai.*` offers a unified,
 forward-thinking structure.

-- 
*Posted from
  PhoNews Pro for Android V.3.13.3
  News.individual.net*

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2667

Bingo3331 <invalid@invalid.com> writes:
> Thank you for your feedback on our proposal for the `ai.*` hierarchy.
> Corrado Roberto and I would like to explain why we believe `ai.*` is not
> only viable but also a valuable addition to Usenet-and why we hope to earn
> your support.
> You're absolutely right that there are over a dozen groups under
> `comp.ai.*`, and many appear dormant. We've observed this too-groups like
> `comp.ai.neural-nets` or `comp.ai.philosophy` have little to no activity.
> But we see this as an opportunity, not a dead end. The inactivity doesn't
> necessarily reflect a lack of interest in AI itself, but rather that these
> groups, created decades ago, no longer align with today's AI landscape.
> Modern AI-think ChatGPT, Grok, or image/video generators-has evolved far
> beyond the scope of those older groups, which focus on niche or outdated
> topics.

I don’t see why those couldn’t be discussed in the existing groups.

> You suggest placing these groups under `it.*`, and it's a fair idea-after
> all, `it.*` is thriving and Italian-focused. However, we see two key
> reasons to opt for `ai.*` as a top-level hierarchy:
>
> 1. **Thematic Clarity**: `it.*` is a national hierarchy covering everything
> from `it.comp` to `it.hobby`. Nesting AI groups there (e.g.,
> `it.ai.chatgpt`) risks diluting their focus and visibility. AI is a global,
> cutting-edge field deserving its own identity, not a subcategory of a
> catch-all hierarchy. `ai.*` signals to users-Italian or not-that this is
> *the* place for AI discussions, much like `comp.*` does for computing.
>
> 2. **Scalability**: Starting with `ai.ita.*` is just the beginning. A
> top-level `ai.*` allows future growth-`ai.eng.*` for English speakers,
> `ai.fr.*` for French, etc.-without being tied to a single language or
> region. If we limit ourselves to `it.*`, we'd need separate proposals for
> each language community, fragmenting the effort. `ai.*` offers a unified,
> forward-thinking structure.

Your arguments are completely bizarre.

-- 
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2642

On 30.03.2025 23:29 Uhr Bingo3331 wrote:

> Initially, the hierarchy will host
>  Italian-language groups under `ai.ita.*`, but it is designed to be
> scalable and accommodate international communities in the future
> (e.g., `ai.eng.*`, `ai.fr.*`). Below, we outline the details and the
> compelling benefits for the Usenet community.

Are there reasons for not using comp.ai for English and maybe creating
a group in it.* for Italian?

I think creating a lot of groups isn't a good way to handle that.

-- 
kind regards
Marco

Send spam to 1743370143muell@stinkedores.dorfdsl.de

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2663 — Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial Intelligence

On 31/03/25 19:42, Marco Moock wrote:

>Are there reasons for not using comp.ai for English and maybe creating
>a group in it.* for Italian?
>
>I think creating a lot of groups isn't a good way to handle that.


Dear Marco Moock,

Thank you for your feedback on our `ai.*` proposal! We appreciate your
 thoughtful questions, and Corrado Roberto and I are happy to address them.
 Your points about leveraging existing hierarchies and avoiding
 over-proliferation of groups are well-taken, and we’d like to explain why
 we believe `ai.*` is the right path forward—while remaining open to your
 suggestions.

---

### **Why Not Just Use comp.ai.* for English and it.* for Italian?**
You’re right that `comp.ai.*` and `it.*` are established hierarchies that
 could host AI discussions, and we’ve considered them carefully. However,
 there are a few reasons we’re proposing `ai.*` instead:

1. **comp.ai.* is Stagnant**: While `comp.ai.*` exists for English-language
 AI topics, most of its groups—like `comp.ai.neural-nets` or
 `comp.ai.philosophy`—are virtually inactive. From what we’ve seen, they
 haven’t kept up with modern AI developments (e.g., ChatGPT, generative
 models). We’re not convinced that adding English posts there would revive
 them; it might just get lost in the noise. `ai.*` offers a fresh, focused
 space to capture today’s AI enthusiasm, starting with `ai.ita.*` and
 potentially expanding (e.g., `ai.eng.*`).

2. **it.* Limits Scalability**: Creating an Italian AI group like `it.ai` or
 `it.comp.ai` is a solid idea, and `it.*` is indeed active thanks to the
 Italian community. But nesting AI under `it.*` ties it to a national
 hierarchy, which works great for local topics but less so for a global
 field like AI. `ai.*` lets us start with `ai.ita.*` for Italians while
 leaving room for other languages (e.g., `ai.fr.*`, `ai.de.*`) without
 needing separate proposals for each. It’s a more unified, future-proof
 approach.

That said, we’re not ruling out synergy with `comp.ai.*` or `it.*`. We could
 crosspost between `ai.ita.general` and `it.comp` to kickstart activity, or
 even revive `comp.ai.*` as a parallel effort. What do you think about that
 as a bridge?

---

### **On Creating Many Groups**
We hear your concern about creating too many groups—fragmentation is a real
 risk, especially with Usenet’s declining traffic. Our goal isn’t to flood
 the network with empty spaces but to start with a manageable, targeted set
 under `ai.ita.*`. Here’s our reasoning:

- **Focused Scope**: The seven proposed groups (`ai.ita.general`,
 `ai.ita.chatgpt`, etc.) cover distinct, popular AI topics—general
 discussion, specific tools (ChatGPT, Grok, DeepSeek), and applications
 (image/video generation)—plus `ai.ita.stats` to monitor usage. They’re not
 arbitrary; they reflect what’s trending in AI today, which we hope will
 draw users.
- **Controlled Growth**: We’re not launching dozens of groups at once. These
 seven are a pilot to test demand. `ai.ita.stats` will track activity,
 letting us prune inactive ones or add new ones only if there’s real
 interest. It’s a data-driven approach to avoid sprawl.
- **Critical Mass**: A single group (e.g., `it.ai`) might struggle to build
 momentum, whereas a small cluster under `ai.ita.*` creates a visible “hub”
 that’s easier to promote and populate.

We’d love your take on this—would fewer groups (say, three or four) feel
 more sustainable to you? We’re flexible on the number if it helps win your
 support.

---

### **Why ai.* is Worth a Shot**
Marco, we share your desire to see Usenet thrive. AI is buzzing
 everywhere—X, Reddit, conferences—and Usenet risks missing out without a
 modern, dedicated space. `comp.ai.*` feels like a relic; `it.*` is great
 but narrow. `ai.*` is a bold move to signal that Usenet can evolve,
 starting with the Italian community and growing from there. Corrado’s ready
 to handle the tech side (server, peering, PGP controls), so it’s low-effort
 for other admins.

Could we convince you to back this as an experiment? Propagate `ai.ita.*`,
 watch the stats, and see if it takes off. If it does, Usenet wins; if not,
 we pivot. Your support could make the difference—any tweaks you’d suggest
 to feel good about it?

Looking forward to your thoughts!


-- 
*Posted from
  PhoNews Pro for Android V.3.13.3
  News.individual.net*

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2665 — Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial Intelligence

On 01.04.2025 17:26 Uhr Bingo3331 wrote:

> 1. **comp.ai.* is Stagnant**: While `comp.ai.*` exists for
> English-language AI topics, most of its groups—like
> `comp.ai.neural-nets` or `comp.ai.philosophy`—are virtually inactive.
> From what we’ve seen, they haven’t kept up with modern AI
> developments (e.g., ChatGPT, generative models). We’re not convinced
> that adding English posts there would revive them; it might just get
> lost in the noise. `ai.*` offers a fresh, focused space to capture
> today’s AI enthusiasm, starting with `ai.ita.*` and potentially
> expanding (e.g., `ai.eng.*`).

comp.ai exist for general topics. There isn't much traffic, so nothing
is being lost in the noise.

> 2. **it.* Limits Scalability**: Creating an Italian AI group like
> `it.ai` or `it.comp.ai` is a solid idea, and `it.*` is indeed active
> thanks to the Italian community. But nesting AI under `it.*` ties it
> to a national hierarchy, which works great for local topics but less
> so for a global field like AI. `ai.*` lets us start with `ai.ita.*`
> for Italians while leaving room for other languages (e.g., `ai.fr.*`,
> `ai.de.*`) without needing separate proposals for each. It’s a more
> unified, future-proof approach.

I do not see any reason non-Italians who speak Italian should not use a
group in it.*.

In de.*, we have people from Austria and Switzerland too.

You could list the groups in an FAQ in the general English groups.

> That said, we’re not ruling out synergy with `comp.ai.*` or `it.*`.
> We could crosspost between `ai.ita.general` and `it.comp` to
> kickstart activity, or even revive `comp.ai.*` as a parallel effort.
> What do you think about that as a bridge?

Revive the already existing groups.
They are already available on the servers and people know the
hierarchies.

> We’d love your take on this—would fewer groups (say, three or four)
> feel more sustainable to you? We’re flexible on the number if it
> helps win your support.

Usenet is already full of unused groups, which makes finding
discussions rather difficult. That is why I advocate for using the
places that already exist.

> ### **Why ai.* is Worth a Shot**
> Marco, we share your desire to see Usenet thrive. AI is buzzing
>  everywhere—X, Reddit, conferences—and Usenet risks missing out
> without a modern, dedicated space.


> Could we convince you to back this as an experiment?

It is your choice anyway. You can create the control files you want and
server operators can follow them, so the groups exist. big-8 and it.*
are already familiar, so most users can use that. I dunno if most NNTP
operators will add another hierarchy, but if you really want, give it a
try.
I also don't know how web archives will handle that.

> Propagate `ai.ita.*`, watch the stats, and see if it takes off. If it
> does, Usenet wins; if not, we pivot. Your support could make the
> difference—any tweaks you’d suggest to feel good about it?

I can't support nor not-support that - I can just give my opinion. I
don't run a news server, but I run a web gateway (only German groups
currently).

If you really want to create that hierarchy, I might add it, but my
server is rather slow.

-- 
kind regards
Marco

Send spam to 1743521169muell@stinkedores.dorfdsl.de

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2658

Hi Bingo3331 and Roberto,

> `ai.*` as a new top-level hierarchy on Usenet, dedicated to
> artificial intelligence (AI) it is designed to be scalable and
> accommodate international communities in the future (e.g.,
> `ai.eng.*`, `ai.fr.*`)

Please note that "ai" does not work for all languages.  In French, it is 
"ia" (intelligence artificielle).

By the way, the French-speaking hierarchy already has a newsgroup 
dedicated to AI (fr.comp.ia) which regularly has messages.


> Usenet has seen declining participation. A modern, high-profile hierarchy
> like `ai.*`, focused on a trending topic, can attract both seasoned users
> and newcomers fascinated by AI. The bilingual approach of `ai.ita.*`
> (Italian primary, English welcome) bridges local and global communities,
> boosting engagement across borders.

I am unsure a new top-hierarchy level will have more adoption than 
currently existing newsgroups.  It is great to see enthusiasm in 
promoting more discussions and reviving Usenet newsgroups.  Why not just 
use that energy to start discussions in current well-established 
newsgroups in it.*, comp.*, de.*, uk.*, etc. and bring along more 
contributors?

-- 
Julien ÉLIE

« – C'est joli cette avenue le long de la mer… Ça s'appelle comment ?
   – La promenade des Bretons. » (Astérix)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2660 — Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial Intelligence

Dear Julien ÉLIE,

Thank you for your thoughtful feedback on our `ai.*` proposal. We greatly
 value your insights, especially given your experience with Usenet and its
 international communities. Corrado Roberto and I would like to address your
 points and explain why we believe `ai.*` can complement—rather than compete
 with—existing groups, while inviting your support to make this a success.


You’re absolutely right that "ai" (Artificial Intelligence) is
 English-centric and doesn’t align with all languages, like French’s "ia"
 (intelligence artificielle). This is a fair critique, and we appreciate you
 raising it. Our choice of `ai.*` stems from its widespread recognition in
 tech discourse—think "AI" in headlines, conferences, and tools like ChatGPT
 or Grok—which gives it a universal shorthand appeal, even if imperfect.
 That said, we don’t see it as a barrier but an opportunity.

The `ai.*` hierarchy is designed to be flexible. While we’re starting with
 `ai.ita.*` for Italian speakers, its top-level structure allows for
 language-specific adaptations—like `ai.fr.*` for French "ia" discussions or
 `ai.de.*` for German "KI" (Künstliche Intelligenz). We’d love your input on
 how to make this naming inclusive from the start—perhaps a parallel `ia.*`
 alias for French-speaking peers? Our goal isn’t to impose "ai" globally but
 to create a hub that can evolve with contributions from communities like
 yours.

---

We’re encouraged to hear that `fr.comp.ia` is active with regular messages—a
 sign that AI discussions have a pulse on Usenet! You’re right to question
 whether a new hierarchy will gain more traction than established groups
 like `fr.comp.ia`, `it.*`, or `comp.*`. We share your caution about
 adoption, which is why we see `ai.*` not as a replacement, but as a
 catalyst.

The reality is that many AI-related groups—like those under `comp.ai.*`—are
 largely dormant, as another admin noted. `fr.comp.ia` is an exception, but
 its success seems tied to a specific linguistic community. We believe the
 broader Usenet ecosystem lacks a modern, unified space for AI that
 transcends fragmented or outdated hierarchies. `ai.*` offers a fresh,
 centralized identity—starting with `ai.ita.*` to leverage the active
 Italian `it.*` community—that can spark interest where older groups
 haven’t.

Rather than diverting energy from existing groups, we aim to amplify them.
 For instance, we could crosspost between `ai.ita.chatgpt` and `fr.comp.ia`
 to share ideas across languages, or use `ai.ita.stats` to analyze trends
 that benefit all AI groups. Why not both? Revive current groups *and*
 launch `ai.*` as a bold signal that Usenet is adapting to today’s tech
 landscape.

---
We completely agree that enthusiasm is key to reviving Usenet, and we’re
 channeling ours into `ai.*` because AI is a global phenomenon that deserves
 a prominent stage here. Posting in `it.*` or `comp.*` is a great start, but
 a new hierarchy offers visibility and structure that scattered efforts
 can’t match. It’s a chance to attract new users—drawn by AI’s buzz—who
 might then explore `fr.*`, `de.*`, or `uk.*`.

Julien, your expertise with `fr.comp.ia` makes you a perfect ally. What if
 we collaborated? Support `ai.*`’s propagation, and we’ll ensure `ai.fr.*`
 reflects French "ia" conventions, linking it to `fr.comp.ia`. Corrado
 Roberto is ready to handle peering and PGP-signed controls (his key’s been
 active since 1998), so the technical lift is minimal. Let’s test `ai.ita.*`
 as a pilot—if it gains traction, it proves the concept for broader
 adoption.

What do you say? Could we tweak the proposal—maybe adjust naming or scope—to
 win your backing? We’d be thrilled to have you on board to shape this
 revival.

Looking forward to your thoughts!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2668

Hi Bingo3331,

> We’d love your input on how to make this naming inclusive from the
> start—perhaps a parallel `ia.*` alias for French-speaking peers? Our
> goal isn’t to impose "ai" globally but to create a hub that can
> evolve with contributions from communities like yours.
Thanks for your detailed answer and having shared your thoughts about 
the proposals.  May I ask whether you use AI to help to write your messages?
I definitely do not recommend parallel hierarchies like ia.* for 
French-speaking people nor ki.* for German-speaking people, etc.


> Posting in `it.*` or `comp.*` is a great start, but
> a new hierarchy offers visibility and structure that scattered efforts
> can’t match. It’s a chance to attract new users—drawn by AI’s buzz—who
> might then explore `fr.*`, `de.*`, or `uk.*`.

Usenet lacks visibility in results from search engines, so I wonder why 
it wouldn't also be the case for a new ai.* hierarchy.  People would 
have to find it, and be provided with an easy modern way to read and 
post messages.


> Julien, your expertise with `fr.comp.ia` makes you a perfect ally.
> What if we collaborated?  Could we tweak the proposal—maybe adjust naming
> or scope—to win your backing?

Thanks for the kind proposal.  I am afraid I do not have enough spare 
time to properly handle the subject, and also other priorities.

-- 
Julien ÉLIE

« Avez-vous remarqué qu'à table les mets que l'on vous sert vous mettent
   les mots à la bouche ? » (Raymond Devos)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2671

On 01.04.2025 21:34 Julien ÉLIE wrote:

> Usenet lacks visibility in results from search engines, so I wonder
> why it wouldn't also be the case for a new ai.* hierarchy.  People
> would have to find it, and be provided with an easy modern way to
> read and post messages.

Web archives like narkive or rslight exist.

They can also be used to post.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2674 — Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial Intelligence

On 01/04/25 21:34, Julien ÉLIE wrote:
>Hi Bingo3331,
>
>May I ask whether you use AI to help to >write your messages?
>
You asked if I’m using AI to write these messages—fair question! I’ll be
 honest: I’ve been working with Grok  to help draft them.
We’re passionate about this project and see AI as a partner to communicate
 effectively, not a replacement for our voices. 
I’m excited about this project and thought it’d be fitting to use AI to
 pitch an AI hierarchy! That said, if it comes off as too polished or
 impersonal, I can switch to a different style.

>I definitely do not recommend parallel hierarchies like ia.* for 
>French-speaking people nor ki.* for German-speaking people, etc.
>
Our plan is to stick with `ai.*` as a single, flexible hierarchy. We’ll
 start with `ai.ita.*` for Italian speakers, keeping "ai" as a recognizable
 tech shorthand, and any future groups (e.g., for French or German) can fit
 under `ai.fr.*` or `ai.de.*` with tailored charters. Does that feel like a
 simpler, more unified way forward to you?

>
>Usenet lacks visibility in results from search engines, so I wonder why 
>it wouldn't also be the case for a new ai.* hierarchy.  People would 
>have to find it, and be provided with an easy modern way to read and 
>post messages.
>

Your point about Usenet’s lack of visibility in search engines is
 spot-on—and it’s a big reason we’re pushing `ai.*`. You’re right that a new
 hierarchy won’t magically appear on Google, which is why we’re pairing it
 with a promotion strategy. We’re planning:
- **Social Media Outreach**: Posts on X, Reddit (e.g., r/artificial), and
 Italian tech forums to drive traffic, with links to a simple "How to Join
 ai.ita.*" guide.
- **Modern Access**: A PDF tutorial for newbies (Thunderbird setup, server
 list) and a potential web gateway via Corrado’s server (e.g., a basic
 NNTP-to-web interface if feasible).
- **Crossposting**: Linking `ai.ita.*` to active groups like `it.*` to
 piggyback on existing visibility.

We know Usenet’s old-school charm is also its hurdle. That’s why we’re
 committed to making `ai.*` discoverable and user-friendly. If it works, it
 could set a model for other hierarchies. Any suggestions on boosting
 visibility you’d recommend?

>
>Thanks for the kind proposal.  I am afraid I do not have enough spare 
>time to properly handle the subject, and >also other priorities.
>

We totally understand your time constraints and other priorities—thanks for
 being candid. We’re not asking you to take on extra work; Corrado’s got the
 technical side covered (server, peering, PGP controls), and I’m handling
 promotion. What we’d love is your moral support—or at least a neutral
 stance. If `ai.ita.*` takes off (we’ll track it with `ai.ita.stats`), it
 could benefit `fr.comp.ia` too, maybe through shared discussions. No
 pressure, but your blessing as a respected voice could encourage other
 admins to propagate it.

What do you think? Could we tweak anything—promotion, access, or scope—to
 ease your doubts? We’re all about reviving Usenet together, and your wisdom
 is invaluable.

Looking forward to your thoughts when you have a moment!

-- 
*Posted from
  PhoNews Pro for Android V.3.13.3
  News.individual.net*

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2675 — Re: Proposal for the New Top-Level Hierarchy ai.* - Artificial Intelligence

Bingo3331 <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:

>>. . . 

>Our plan is to stick with `ai.*` as a single, flexible hierarchy. We'll
> start with `ai.ita.*` for Italian speakers, keeping "ai" as a recognizable
> tech shorthand, and any future groups (e.g., for French or German) can fit
> under `ai.fr.*` or `ai.de.*` with tailored charters. Does that feel like a
> simpler, more unified way forward to you?

While there are top-level international hierarchies that mix languages,
this is atypical. It's far more common to indicate the language -- if
not English -- with an international "language" hierarchy. That's why
you are being advised to use it.* for Italian-language discussion and
fr.* for French-language discussion.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2716

Bingo3331 <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in news:m4u2dvFq8dlU1
@mid.individual.net:

> ### **Request for Discussion: Creation of the ai.* Hierarchy**
<snip>

Please don't propose or approve this for global consumption.  There are 
already .ai groups and other groups that discuss ai issues.  The idea of ai 
agents is a very bad idea (IMHO).

David -- on USENET since before email was standardized

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2718

Op 2-8-2025 om 20:17 schreef David LaRue:
> Bingo3331 <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in news:m4u2dvFq8dlU1
> @mid.individual.net:
> 
>> ### **Request for Discussion: Creation of the ai.* Hierarchy**
> <snip>
> 
> Please don't propose or approve this for global consumption.  There are
> already .ai groups and other groups that discuss ai issues.  The idea of ai
> agents is a very bad idea (IMHO).
> 
> David -- on USENET since before email was standardized

You are reacting on an old post.
That discussion ended already begin April.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | news.admin.hierarchies

csiph-web