Raspberry Pi Tips, Tricks & Fixes is a magazine I picked up last year, its listed as Volume 35 (Fall 2019).
Its pretty cool, and goes over some basic RPi projects, Linux commands, Python, C++ and just a lot of basic RPi stuff...
In the last section, Raspberry Pi and Beyond, it goes over some projects to do... the second to last one is Pi Projects: BBS Client.
It's a two page article, and explains how to compile SyncTerm under Raspian on an RPi. It's written well, and certainly will get a user connecting to BBSes.
For anyone wanting to read it, I think I've hosted the photos correctly:
https://ibb.co/jW601ny
https://ibb.co/M8zcMST
I thought it was a pretty decent writeup, that had SyncTerm in it and did a good job of getting a newcomer into BBSes. I wish they'd of listed a telnet BBS directory, or Vertrauen Synchronet main BBS... but, ya get what ya get.
Raspberry Pi Tips, Tricks & Fixes is a magazine I picked up last year, its listed as Volume 35 (Fall 2019).[snip]
I thought it was a pretty decent writeup, that had SyncTerm in it and did a good job of getting a newcomer into BBSes. I wish they'd of listed a telnet BBS directory, or Vertrauen Synchronet main BBS... but, ya get what ya get.
Re: Nice BBS/SyncTerm article in Raspberry Pi Tips, Tricks & Fixes
By: Paulie420 to All on Wed May 13 2020 11:19 am
That's awesome! Much appreciate your bringing that to my (and Deuce's) attention!
I couldn't find the magazine in stock anywhere to buy, but it is available for PDF-download from here: https://filecr.com/elearning/raspberry-pi-tips-tricks-fixed/
digital man
Raspberry Pi Tips, Tricks & Fixes is a magazine I picked up last year, its listed as Volume 35 (Fall 2019).
I thought it was a pretty decent writeup, that had SyncTerm in it and did a good job of getting a newcomer into BBSes. I wish they'd of listed a telnet BBS directory, or Vertrauen Synchronet main BBS... but, ya get what ya get.
I like the statement "In a world of internet snooping, a BBS is probably one of the last bastions of digital privacy".
Hello Paulie420!
** On Wednesday 13.05.20 - 14:19, paulie420 wrote to All:
Raspberry Pi Tips, Tricks & Fixes is a magazine I picked up last year,[snip]
its listed as Volume 35 (Fall 2019).
That was pretty good. I wasn't aware that there once was a Google BBS Tunnel thing around. I thought I was looking at a Lynx/Links type of browser display.
I like the statement "In a world of internet snooping, a BBS is probably one of the last bastions of digital privacy".
That is a "selling" point that sysops ought to promote.
../|ug
I like the statement "In a world of internet snooping, a BBS is probably one of the last bastions of digital privacy".
That is a "selling" point that sysops ought to promote.
I like the statement "In a world of internet snooping, a BBS is
probably one of the last bastions of digital privacy".
It's so not true, though. As a sysop I can see EVERYTHING a user does. I can read their private e-mail, if I want to (for the record, I do not want to).
I can do all of this very easily. and it's mostly performed over telnet, which is an unencrypted communication method.
DaiTengu
or only allow logged in users to view the messages... that would eliminate the spiders and bots from scraping them...
Rampage wrote to Nightfox <=-
or only allow logged in users to view the messages... that would
eliminate the spiders and bots from scraping them...
or only allow logged in users to view the messages... that would
eliminate the spiders and bots from scraping them...
or only allow logged in users to view the messages... that would
eliminate the spiders and bots from scraping them...
Nightfox> I wonder if it's possible to configure ecwebv4 to do that.
i would imagine that it would use the same thing that you would use on your BBS to prevent guests from reading the areas... maybe let them see the groups and the areas but not actually read any messages... depends on your style of prevention ;)
Rampage wrote to Nightfox <=-
or only allow logged in users to view the messages... that would
eliminate the spiders and bots from scraping them...
I've often thought we should make a campaign to urge defaults on web BBS software to limit access out of the box and to remind sysops to check their configs.
I've often thought we should make a campaign to urge defaults on web
BBS software to limit access out of the box and to remind sysops to
check their configs.
Re: Re: Nice BBS/SyncTerm article in Raspberry Pi Tips, Tricks & Fixes
By: paulie420 to poindexter FORTRAN on Thu May 14 2020 16:56:04
I've often thought we should make a campaign to urge defaults on
web BBS software to limit access out of the box and to remind
sysops to check their configs.
paulie420> Yes; I'm just now jumping into user levels and flag defaults paulie420> because out of the box synchro is NEWUSER--> open to all.
new users are one thing... guests are another... anonymous access via web server is done with the guest account... no guest account, no access for unregistered visitors but one can also have a guest account with restrictions...
for example, some systems might allow guests to play door games while others might let guests see the door games list but not play any of them... the same goes for message groups and areas as well as the file libraries and they areas they contain...
)\/(ark
On 05-15-20 17:59, paulie420 wrote to Rampage <=-
Is there really any negative consequences of not having a guest
account? digital man and the synchronet guys have historically always
said its smart to have a guest account - but I never did with other softwares. I thought that 'it is smart' because of some synchro needs
or something; but the deeper I get into the software I think its just preference. I may do away with it altogether.
And, I like my new users to have access to local message bases and the main file section; not FTN/QWK messages nor special file areas... even after a simple email registration, QWK/FTN are ok - but the files come
one step after...
The email thing is hard for me, cause Xfinity blocks port 25 and I
typed all the vert-linking stuff in to no avail; YET. :P I'll get it...
Is there really any negative consequences of not having a guest account? digital man and the synchronet guys have historically always said its smart to have a guest account - but I never did with other softwares. I
Rampage wrote to paulie420 <=-
paulie420> Yes; I'm just now jumping into user levels and flag
defaults
paulie420> because out of the box synchro is NEWUSER--> open to all.
new users are one thing... guests are another... anonymous access via
web server is done with the guest account... no guest account, no
access for unregistered visitors but one can also have a guest account with restrictions...
for example, some systems might allow guests to play door games while others might let guests see the door games list but not play any of them... the same goes for message groups and areas as well as the file libraries and they areas they contain...
paulie420 wrote to Rampage <=-
Is there really any negative consequences of not having a guest
account?
Vk3jed wrote to paulie420 <=-
The email thing is hard for me, cause Xfinity blocks port 25 and I
typed all the vert-linking stuff in to no avail; YET. :P I'll get it...
You might have to resort to a VPN with a static IP, if all else fails.
:)
That was pretty good. I wasn't aware that there once was a Google BBS Tunnel thing around. I thought I was looking at a Lynx/Links type of
I like the statement "In a world of internet snooping, a BBS is probably one of the last bastions of digital privacy".
Rampage wrote to Nightfox <=-
or only allow logged in users to view the messages... that would eliminate the spiders and bots from scraping them...
I've often thought we should make a campaign to urge defaults on web BBS software to limit access out of the box and to remind sysops to check their configs.
Is there really any negative consequences of not having a guest account? digital man and the synchronet guys have historically always said its smart have a guest account - but I never did with other softwares. I thought that is smart' because of some synchro needs or something; but the deeper I get i
Rampage wrote to paulie420 <=-
paulie420> Yes; I'm just now jumping into user levels and flag
defaults
paulie420> because out of the box synchro is NEWUSER--> open to all.
Yes, to Mark's point, I let guests see my local areas. I'm not concerned about Google getting to them. Any networked area requires authenticated access.
paulie420 wrote to Rampage <=-
Is there really any negative consequences of not having a guest
account?
I'm not sure how the web server would behave, and you wouldn't be able to do anonymous FTP.
I like the statement "In a world of internet snooping, a BBS is probably Og>> one of the last bastions of digital privacy".
That is a "selling" point that sysops ought to promote.
Many BBSes these days have a web interface, so the messages are visible
on the web, which isn't totally private. I suppose the best way around
that would be for the sysop to disable web access to their BBS.
On 05-16-20 09:03, poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Vk3jed <=-
You might have to resort to a VPN with a static IP, if all else fails.
:)
I've used services over the years to get around port restrictions. They act as your primary MX, then contact your server on a non-standard (non-blocked) port.
By digital privacy, I and the article are referring to the information being tracker-free, telemetry-free and ad-free.
I think you would be hardpressed to find a copy of this message with a simple google search.
I think you would be hardpressed to find a copy of this message with a simple google search.
Re: Re: Nice BBS/SyncTerm article in Raspberry Pi Tips, Tricks & Fixes
By: Ogg to All on Sun May 17 2020 12:57 am
hey, a lot of synchronet bbses have their web interface showing msg subs to the public.
so it would be pretty easy to find our msgs in a simple google search. you might even see 20 or so different bbses showing the same results.
I think you would be hardpressed to find a copy of this message with a Ogg>> simple google search.
give it time ;)
you might want to bookmark this search and check it every once in a while over the next days/weeks...
https://www.google.com/search?q="would+be+hardpressed+to+find+a+copy+of+th is+message"
shorter versions of the above do currently return some results but given
some time, the above will return your message...
Interesting. But are Dovenet messages showing up now?
I like the statement "In a world of internet snooping, a BBS is probably one of the last bastions of digital privacy".
That is a "selling" point that sysops ought to promote.
Many BBSes these days have a web interface, so the messages are visible on the web, which isn't totally private. I suppose the best way around that would be for the sysop to disable web access to their BBS.
Interesting. But are Dovenet messages showing up now?
yes, they have been for years...
here're the results for one specific system... you can try others, as
well...
https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Asestar.synchro.net+dovenet
[snip]It's so not true, though. As a sysop I can see EVERYTHING a user does. I Da>> can read their private e-mail, if I want to (for the record, I do not
want to).
I can do all of this very easily. and it's mostly performed over telnet, Da>> which is an unencrypted communication method.
Well, DaiTengu, I can appreciate where your going with this.. and
However, I think the point is that unlike the social networks that are
run by major corporations of the world, a sysop reading my information
and getting a giggle out of me and someone I'm trying to speak
privately to is NOT as bad as a google - that is taking that
information and monetizing it.
I think the reference to digital privacy is more about keeping said information out of the hands of those large corporations and less
about some random sysop having the access. In that respect, BBSes do
offer a form of privacy that is extinct in the current internet age.
That was pretty good. I wasn't aware that there once was a Google BBS
Tunnel thing around. I thought I was looking at a Lynx/Links type of
browser display.
I don't think that there was actually a Google BBS tunnel... I guess I could be wrong, but... anyway; let me know if you see or use that. I'd
dig linking it to my BBS. :P Lol. I think that was just photoshop
wizardry, not an actual service.
Glad ya'll dug that little find of mine - I'm super happy that they
linked Syncterm as opposed to some other crappier way of connecting.
IMO, that article will get folks connected to BBSes the right way. I
wish a larger publication would pick up boards. We're still kickin
over here and all.. :P
Syncterm is probably the only choice that will work with computers Win7 and up. Personally, I wanted to stick with Netrunner (I like it's
But I am forced to use Syncterm on my Win7 pc - and resizing is a bit
techy requiring to experiment with picking the font size and numbers. Syncterm does not seem to retain my settings the next time I load it. :(
Hello Paulie420!
** On Thursday 14.05.20 - 00:04, paulie420 wrote to DaiTengu:
I think the reference to digital privacy is more about keeping said
information out of the hands of those large corporations and less
about some random sysop having the access. In that respect, BBSes do
offer a form of privacy that is extinct in the current internet age.
The public is just blindly carrying on and giving places like FB all our information for nothing but it should be for $omething.
Hello Paulie420!
According to what I found, there *was* a webified type of thing (like fTelnet) that looked like a google search page but in ascii/colour.
But, IMHO it is stupid to operate such a thing as a service on a webpage. A search engine tool like that would be best as door on a BBS.
you can use mt32 [i still do], qodem, syncterm, netrunner [not a fan] and a few other ones i cant remember off the bat.
you can even use dosbox and use an old school terminal program. that makes it fun sometimes.
The public is just blindly carrying on and giving places like FB all
our information for nothing but it should be for $omething.
What I'd prefer, as an alternative, is paying $10/mo for a totally ad-
free track-free everything-free Facebook. Just let me pay, because the service, content and amount of people on it are valuable, for the
service that I use.
And leave me out of all the algorithmn bullshit.
What I'd prefer, as an alternative, is paying $10/mo for a totally ad-free track-free everything-free Facebook. Just let me pay, because the service, content and amount of people on it are valuable, for the service that I use.
And leave me out of all the algorithmn bullshit.
Syncterm does not seem to retain my settings the next time I load it. :(
Ogg wrote to paulie420 <=-
Even $1/mo is too much! It is OUR data that they are using. The
cashflow should come in OUR direction.
Even $1/mo is too much! It is OUR data that they are using. The
cashflow should come in OUR direction.
Jaron Lanier has a book called "You are not a Gadget" that describes a micropayment system where art and content creators can be paid directly..
He's pretty outspoken about the state of the tech, and has an interesting
Ted talk called something like "Why you need to quit social media".
But I am forced to use Syncterm on my Win7 pc - and resizing is a bit techy requiring to experiment with picking the font size and numbers. Syncterm does not seem to retain my settings the next time I load it. :(
What version?
Ogg wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
"We cannot have a society in which, if two people wish to communicate,
the only way that can happen is if it's financed by a third person who wishes to manipulate them" - Jaron Lanier.
On 18/05/2020 8:45 p.m., Digital Man wrote:
But I am forced to use Syncterm on my Win7 pc - and resizing is a bit techy requiring to experiment with picking the font size and numbers. Syncterm does not seem to retain my settings the next time I load it. :(
What version?
1.1b here.
I think I got it to cooperate a little better.
When it is set to maximize, and then [x] close it, the next time I launch it, it
then restores to the size I want.
Otherwise, I can't resize it to the size I want while it runs. Instead,it just resets to a window that is 1/4 of the size of my display.
Nice. That one works much better! Resizing via the corners is essential. Thanks.1.1b here.
Maybe try 1.1rc4? 1.1b is a moving target and without a source date, I couldn't guess what code you're running.
Just drawing the window's corners with the mouse should be able to resize/scale to whatever you like. For integer multiple scaling, use Alt-Arrow key combination to resize instead.
Syncterm is probably the only choice that will work with computers
Win7 and up. Personally, I wanted to stick with Netrunner..
you can use mt32 [i still do], qodem, syncterm, netrunner [not a fan]
and a few other ones i cant remember off the bat.
you can even use dosbox and use an old school terminal program. that
makes it fun sometimes.
Thanks for the alternative suggestions. The latest SyncTerm solved the problem on the Win7 pc.
I'm not much into experimenting with other terminals. Netrunner and SyncTerm are good enough at the moment and get the job done.
i understand that. i have always been a fan of mt32 and i use syncterm only when needed. i'm also an old buddy of dink but i lost touch with him.
last i heard from another sysop here he isnt doing so well.
| Sysop: | altere |
|---|---|
| Location: | Houston, TX |
| Users: | 66 |
| Nodes: | 4 (0 / 4) |
| Uptime: | 03:41:13 |
| Calls: | 613 |
| Calls today: | 3 |
| Files: | 7,638 |
| Messages: | 292,639 |