Live data from Hacker News

Why isn't the internet more fun and weird? (2019)

jarredsumner.com

201–210 of 283 posts

Re: Why isn't the internet more fun and weird? (2019)

#201
It's an awkward and elitist thing to say, but I believe it to be true: whatever is embraced by the masses, suffers in some ways.

The expert/nerd internet was pioneering, weird, edgy, cooperative. The internet for the masses is...different.

You'll see the same effect in movies, following "safe" formulas. Every movie must have a romantic side story, no matter how irrelevant. It must deliver to the broadest audience possible. And of course, nothing should be thought-provoking, keep it middle of the road.

Check out musical charts, songs are so repetitive that they seem AI generated.

I've found another recent example in F1 racing. It's a pretty technical sport that used to have a fairly limited following. Now the thing is exploding and there's friction between the "original" fans and the clueless idiots spoiling the well (not my words).

As soon as you have the masses on board, this obviously also invites a heavy commercialization of any space, with goals entirely opposite to the original spirit of the internet.

Concluding, the only way to get it back, is to be elitist. Create well defined spaces, heavily curated in both members and content.

Re: Why isn't the internet more fun and weird? (2019)

#202
post #9

I remember the thousands of interesting and weird pages listed on StumbleUpon - directories of obscure topics, avant garde art projects and detailed field specific blogs - many of them both pretty and thoroughly made. Mind expanding stuff. I feel like today all of that has moved to silos like tiktok and instagram, in extreme short form formats that are easily disposable - so almost no one creates truly great "compila…

I remember things like the DOOM FAQ https://doomwiki.org/wiki/Official_Doom_FAQ/Original_text and there was one for Star Wars, also. I printed them out and read them; hundreds of pages.

Re: Why isn't the internet more fun and weird? (2019)

#205
post #9

I remember the thousands of interesting and weird pages listed on StumbleUpon - directories of obscure topics, avant garde art projects and detailed field specific blogs - many of them both pretty and thoroughly made. Mind expanding stuff. I feel like today all of that has moved to silos like tiktok and instagram, in extreme short form formats that are easily disposable - so almost no one creates truly great "compila…

I was at StumbleUpon at shutdown and for a few years before. I'm creating a single-purpose account to avoid doxxing myself on my main account. Here's a non-exhaustive list of things that killed SU.

SU relied on individual human curators to discover worthy new web pages instead of trying to crawl the web in bulk. Our most passionate users, the people who would submit great new URLs, tag URLs, rate heavily, and curate good collections, were heavy users of our XUL based Firefox extension. We were never able to build an extension as featureful post-XUL and that hurt new content acquisition and categorization.

The linked content we served to users on the web had to be iframeable. That described most of the web in the early years of SU. By the time of the shutdown, most new sites and even many established sites couldn't be displayed in iframes any more. It would have been technically possible to replicate most of the iframe experience without iframes by serving up our own crawled copies of pages, but then we would have been infringing copyright. Iframes allowed SU to show a third party page without actually copying it.

Over time, more sites disallowed crawling via robots.txt or by thwarting them without prior declaration by rejecting "crawler-looking" requests that didn't come from Google.

Our mobile apps allowed us to serve content in a webview even if it wasn't iframeable, but mobile platforms inherently excluded a lot of the "weird and wonderful" stuff that people loved SU for. For example, our online games category contained mostly Flash games. Even most of the non-Flash games assumed either keyboard or mouse access; few of them worked well on a phone's touch screen. Similar problems applied to other interactive content (simulations, interactive visualizations). Take away the interactive content and SU started to look more like just another app for passive scrolling.

Web pages became increasingly encrusted with ads, nags, and tracking scripts. I was the final developer responsible for maintenance on our Android app. 95% of the performance complaints we received about the app were, in truth, complaints about the analytics and ads an individual recommended web page was loading. This was also the source of 95% of the complaints about ads that we received. SU monetized itself with interstitial ads between recommended web pages. Every ad running on a recommended page was put there by the site owner, not us. But negative reviews and customer emails blamed us for the battery-killing, device-heating, content-obscuring ads running on-page. The ad problem was much less severe for people who used the web site instead of mobile apps, since they were largely power users who had ad blockers installed, but see previous problems about iframes and Firefox plugins.

Consolidation toward siloed content platforms certainly didn't help either. But I think that SU would have been able to keep going until the present day if not for the problems mentioned above. Some of them seem like mere happenstances of history; I could imagine Flash living a lot longer if it hadn't been a notorious source of exploitable security holes. Other things, like long-form articles getting increasingly barnacled with ads, nags, analytics, and paywalls, seem like a more inevitable outcome of the collapse of old-media print revenue.

One thing I've idly pondered since SU shut down is just recommending weird-old-web content that's findable in the Wayback Machine yet missing from the modern internet. The beauty would be two-fold: it's likely to be cleaner content in the first place, and you can transform it (e.g. running Reader Mode over it server-side) without worrying about the site owners coming after you for copyright infringement. Or at least not worrying as much. It seems like marginalia_nu has managed to find a goodly amount of content that still lives so maybe resorting to the Wayback Machine isn't necessary at all.

Re: Why isn't the internet more fun and weird? (2019)

#206
post #148
post #9

I remember the thousands of interesting and weird pages listed on StumbleUpon - directories of obscure topics, avant garde art projects and detailed field specific blogs - many of them both pretty and thoroughly made. Mind expanding stuff. I feel like today all of that has moved to silos like tiktok and instagram, in extreme short form formats that are easily disposable - so almost no one creates truly great "compila…

My site [1] tends to get linked to by these kinds of things (well, more than by normal things) so I've found a few just through referrer traffic, and joining webrings has been fun too. https://gossipsweb.net https://fediring.net https://nightfall.city https://linkbudz.m455.casa https://indieblog.page https://indieweb.xyz https://stumblingon.com https://webring.dinhe.net https://hotlinewebring.club https://handmade-we…

Thanks for this list!

Re: Why isn't the internet more fun and weird? (2019)

#207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of that content has moved to newsletters and Twitter threads. If you know the right people to follow, there are a lot of niche, quirky, and insightful pieces that remind me of the homepages of yore. One problem is that these things get lost in the timeline. So I made a StumbleUpon for Twitter threads [0]. Check it out! [0] https://mood.surf

I really love the design/idea, but after hitting “Shuffle” a few times, it looks like it threw an unhandled exception due to an async error (now I just get a TypeError on every page load): O@https://mood.surf/build/routes/tweets/$tweetId-ID4B42CB.js:1:8106 Zi@https://mood.surf/build/entry.client-R3Z7O5RV.js:5:64683 li@https://mood.surf/build/entry.client-R3Z7O5RV.js:5:74110 bs@https://mood.surf/build/entry.client-R3Z…

Thanks for reporting this. I think it has to do with certain tweets being made private/inaccessible after being added to the index. I'll look into it.

Re: Why isn't the internet more fun and weird? (2019)

#208
These periodic articles hand-wringing over the loss of old internet quirkiness are basically just re-posing a question isomorphic to "Why aren't people more fun and weird?" or "Why isn't society/culture/reality more fun and weird?", which are not actually interesting questions in my opinion. I mean, I get it, the internet used to be a different before it was the primary infrastructure for most human productivity, but is it not basically self-evident why things get less fun and weird when the user base goes from futurist nerds to everyone else?

Re: Why isn't the internet more fun and weird? (2019)

#209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> most people are boring/normal by definition and the internet is now mainstream. The internet used to be filled with a pretty weird subset of the general population but now that is drowned out by the masses. That doesn't explain MySpace, though. Extremely mainstream/mass-oriented, but still fun and weird, while it lasted.

MySpace really wasn't that weird, they just had a bug that allowed people to express themselves with code and decided to leave it.

Exactly; it was novel not weird. And if it had prevailed over FB it would have adopted a slicker, uniform ui by default sooner or later (maybe let old heads keep seeing version 1 like Reddit does).

Re: Why isn't the internet more fun and weird? (2019)

#210
As more people joined the internet, the content reverted to the mean of humanity. What surprised us is just how low down that mean is.

Twitter : We hoped for listening in on The Algonquin Round Table we got listening to the last round at Al's bar.

Facebook We hoped for pleasent updates from our friends lives, we got content moderators with PTSD

Instagram: we hoped for pictures of our friends lives - we got told our friends aren't as good as other peoples friends.

Post reply on HN