Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Are You Ready for the Internet? (1994) [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 204 posts

Re: Are You Ready for the Internet? (1994) [video]

#191

Post by Jimajesty »

alcover wrote: post #114
Jimajesty wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been reading Douglas Copeland's 1994 novel "Microserfs" recently and there's a bit where the main character starts reading up on actual highway construction in response to the information superhighway.

Is it as good as Generation X ? Also I'd love Coupland to reiterate and do a 'Generation Z' about zoomers and digital natives.

He did write a sequel of sorts to Generation X called Generation A in 2009. I haven't read it so I can't comment on it, though I suspect it is already 'of it's time' in the way that, say, Microserfs is. It's a fun novel to be sure, for something that emanates a huge "now-ness circa 1994" it's still very enjoyable today, but maybe that's because I can vaguely remember life back then. I'd wonder what a younger reader might think about it?

Re: Are You Ready for the Internet? (1994) [video]

#192

Post by prng2021 »

ctoth wrote: post #180
prng2021 wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dynamic websites is a core idea of the modern internet and that concept did not exist in 1994 internet. JavaScript did not exist. Modern internet is also real-time and largely community driven. Even the notion of these did not exist in 1994 internet. Websockets did not exist. Social networks did not exist. Video conferencing did not exist. Collaborative document editing did not exist. The ideas of wearables and alway…

> Dynamic websites is a core idea of the modern internet and that concept did not exist in 1994 internet. CGI and other forms of dynamicity absolutely existed in 1994[0]. > JavaScript did not exist. IT just needed 1 more year! > Modern internet is also real-time and largely community driven. Even the notion of these did not exist in 1994 internet. Check out MUDs and MOOs. Lambda was 3 years old in 1994. Wired called…

If you’re going to frame things like that, the internet itself wasn’t revolutionary at all. It was merely combining various decades old technologies, working proof of concepts, and research papers.

Do you also believe smartphones are merely an evolution of the first mobile phone from 1973?

Re: Are You Ready for the Internet? (1994) [video]

#193

Post by revolvingocelot »

solomonb wrote: post #164
revolvingocelot wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The parent comment is 6 minutes, but the full 15 minute interview (about more the the internet) is worth it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLf6KZmJyrA

Has Jeremy Paxman since then reflected on this discussion publicly?

No idea, sorry.

Re: Are You Ready for the Internet? (1994) [video]

#194

Post by [deleted] »

unity1001 wrote: post #187
bcrosby95 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Early Internet still reflected that world order. Early internet had little to none of that world order. Those corporations are slow to act and tend to be last to the party. I think you're conflating people from that world order and how they interpreted the internet, with how the internet actually was. > User-generated content lived in the fringes of the Internet in those days. It was the plebs' place. The unwashed.…

> Early internet had little to none of that world order. Those corporations are slow to act and tend to be last to the party. Those corporations dominated the Internet. It was NYT et al who was doing the publishing and the users doing the reading. Large, incumbent corporations dominated online sales. That they were slow to react to the changes and therefore the user-driven Internet eventually took over from them for…

[deleted]

Re: Are You Ready for the Internet? (1994) [video]

#195

Post by JohnJamesRambo »

dredmorbius wrote: post #141
JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why don’t I even have the option to have friends on Netflix and make lists of movies I watch that I think they would like?

This has been tried ... numerous times. I recall a brief-lived CBS Interactive site / app in the late aughts. Went nowhere. Most such interaction now occurs within extant social groups. Much as you'd watch a TV show or go to a theatre with friends, most people now discuss films on their self-centric social media. FB / Instagram / Reddit / Twitter, etc., usually with at least some people they know directly. Conversing…

Well I mean Netflix has a bit more reach than CBS interactive haha.

Re: Are You Ready for the Internet? (1994) [video]

#196

Post by JohnJamesRambo »

micromacrofoot wrote: post #88
JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why don’t I even have the option to have friends on Netflix and make lists of movies I watch that I think they would like?

This is one of those features that people think they want, and would cost Netflix a ton of money, but would ultimately become filled with spam and would only have a small number of power users. It's a big money pit that does little to retain users and generate revenue. "More social" has been pitched to Spotify countless times and it would likely face a similar fate.

Why would that cost a ton of money?

Re: Are You Ready for the Internet? (1994) [video]

#197

Post by ctoth »

prng2021 wrote: post #192
ctoth wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Dynamic websites is a core idea of the modern internet and that concept did not exist in 1994 internet. CGI and other forms of dynamicity absolutely existed in 1994[0]. > JavaScript did not exist. IT just needed 1 more year! > Modern internet is also real-time and largely community driven. Even the notion of these did not exist in 1994 internet. Check out MUDs and MOOs. Lambda was 3 years old in 1994. Wired called…

If you’re going to frame things like that, the internet itself wasn’t revolutionary at all. It was merely combining various decades old technologies, working proof of concepts, and research papers. Do you also believe smartphones are merely an evolution of the first mobile phone from 1973?

This comment thread started when you pushed back against someone who said:

> when it comes right down to core "mind blowing" new tech, how much have we actually improved on 1994?

You provided examples of core ideas that you thought did not exist in 1994, I showed you how several of them absolutely did.

If I had to make a list of core technologies that didn't exist in 1994, it might consist of things like

CRISPR-Cas9, deep neural networks, electronic cigarettes, self-driving cars, personalized genetics, artificial meat.

Stuff that had either not been conceived of or required technology that didn't exist at the time. Even then, you can find precursors to all of those things since tech development is path-dependent.

But seriously, dynamic websites and online social communities and the like existed then :)

As for smartphones there's a pretty clear lineage that includes early bag phones, pagers, primitive handhelds, Nokia bricks, The Danger Hiptop/Sidekick, Blackberry, and so on.

Check out this ad campaign from 1993[0]:

[0]: AT&T - 1993 "You Will" Ad Campaign https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvZ-667CEdo

Re: Are You Ready for the Internet? (1994) [video]

#198

Post by micromacrofoot »

JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #196
micromacrofoot wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one of those features that people think they want, and would cost Netflix a ton of money, but would ultimately become filled with spam and would only have a small number of power users. It's a big money pit that does little to retain users and generate revenue. "More social" has been pitched to Spotify countless times and it would likely face a similar fate.

Why would that cost a ton of money?

why would building an entire social network cost a ton of money? it’s an entirely different product - dozens of features and content moderation just to get something simple out there…

Re: Are You Ready for the Internet? (1994) [video]

#199

Post by prng2021 »

ctoth wrote: post #197
prng2021 wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you’re going to frame things like that, the internet itself wasn’t revolutionary at all. It was merely combining various decades old technologies, working proof of concepts, and research papers. Do you also believe smartphones are merely an evolution of the first mobile phone from 1973?

This comment thread started when you pushed back against someone who said: > when it comes right down to core "mind blowing" new tech, how much have we actually improved on 1994? You provided examples of core ideas that you thought did not exist in 1994, I showed you how several of them absolutely did. If I had to make a list of core technologies that didn't exist in 1994, it might consist of things like CRISPR-Cas9,…

Of course there’s a precursor to all technologies. Of course smart phones have a clear lineage. Of course everything in existence has a precursor and lineage.

I stand by everything in my original reply. The modern video conferencing tools, collaboration tools, dynamic websites, etc absolutely could not have been made with 1994 technology. I remember that time period well and there were so many revolutionary technologies and ideas missing.

With all the knowledge you have today, could you go back to 1994 and recreate a Facebook or YouTube, serving 1B+ users with real-time interactivity using CGI and Berkeley sockets? No, that’s just laughably absurd.

Re: Are You Ready for the Internet? (1994) [video]

#200

Post by dredmorbius »

JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #195
dredmorbius wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has been tried ... numerous times. I recall a brief-lived CBS Interactive site / app in the late aughts. Went nowhere. Most such interaction now occurs within extant social groups. Much as you'd watch a TV show or go to a theatre with friends, most people now discuss films on their self-centric social media. FB / Instagram / Reddit / Twitter, etc., usually with at least some people they know directly. Conversing…

Well I mean Netflix has a bit more reach than CBS interactive haha.

Well, CBS Interactive is a branch of CBS, the broadcaster.

A decade and a half ago, its reach was greater than Netflix's.

My point wasn't the scale of the hosting network but the failure of broadcaster- (or program-originator-) centric "interactive" television concepts. I think the trope existed even when Neil Postman was writing his books ... not sure if this shows up in Amusing Ourselves to Death or Technopoly, or both, though I think it does. They're 1980s / 1990s. Postman died in 2003 though, so if it was him, it was early in Internet time.

Wikipedia lists attempts dating to the 1950s, though these were not networked interactions. Those existed, however, by 1977.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interactive_television>

Post reply on HN