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

Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

wiby.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 374 posts

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#351

Post by funcDropShadow »

dlkf wrote: post #251
Baeocystin wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a lot of modern web design suffers from the same AB testing failures that got Pepsi into trouble back in the coke/pepsi days of the 80's. I may be misremembering the details, but the gist was that Pepsi was a bit sweeter, and so in the tiny amounts that people tasted during taste tests, they usually prefer the sweeter drink. In normal use, however, that flavor of Pepsi was too sweet, and sales tanked. I see t…

That isn’t how AB tests work. In a (properly-run) AB test, a user will only see one variant. AB tests have shortcomings, but the Pepsi critique isn’t one of them.

Combine A/B testing with exponential growth of the user-base and you will only measure newcomers. Medium, advanced, and expert user simply won't matter in your test results. Whether that is what you need depends on the situation.

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#352

Post by ryzvonusef »

SyzygistSix wrote: post #315
ryzvonusef wrote: post #284

the first link it opened for me is https://www.landoverbaptist.org/... which is banned in my country, I expect because of the word "baptist" :| Anyhoo a second retry got me http://www.bloodgod.org/2006_Christian_Goth_Gathering.htm which um... Anyhoo this is fun, thanks for sharing this, OP. I miss the old days sometimes. I didn't have access to BBS or MUD or whatever in my country, so web 1.0 is what remember most fr…

The first link is a satire Christian website. It looks promising from the homepage. "Armed Churchgoers Slaughter Thousands of Endangered Species in Rousing Show of Support for President Trump!" "Kristian Kids Korner" "Why Did Jesus Have Long Hair Like a Homo?...

Thank you for sharing this, i was indeed curious.

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#353

Post by aerio »

efreak wrote: post #288
aerio wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hence the inclusion of "heavily".

"heavy use of tables". I ran into a script once that took a picture as input and output a massive HTML table with a cell for each pixel and a background color. "Pure html" images without CSS or base64.

Thanks, I love it.

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#354

Post by pests »

glenstein wrote: post #349
pests wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not true. The semantic web people were using it to describe their ambitions.

Right, that's what I mean. Of course it won't stop people, people who are evidently even less acquainted with the subject of than me before I asked my question, from giving confidently incorrect responses. I don't believe that their version of the term web 3.0 really took off the way that the web 2.0 buzzword did, but I vaguely understand the term having a meaning independent of the meaning given to it by crypto enth…

Oh it definitely had a meaning before the crypto people started using it. When I think of Web3 I think of "never really got clearly defined, those semantic web guys got close" and then being used for crypto.

Wikipedia backs me up too[0].

> 08:27, 24 October 2006‎ Lumos3 talk contribs‎ 18,470 bytes +36‎ Web 3 redirects here so should be shown as a synonym

So at the end of 06 Wikipedia was referring to semantic web already as Web 3. The first release of bitcoin wasn't until 09.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Semantic_Web&oldi...

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#355

Post by BizarroLand »

IIsi50MHz wrote: post #339
rruark wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A cheap toaster these days will use a toaster ASIC rather than a general purpose microcontroller or timer. PT8A2514 [1] is one example. Another surprising type of ASICs I've come across are vape ASICS [2]. [1]: https://www.diodes.com/assets/Datasheets/PT8A2514A.pdf [2]: http://robruark.com/other/Teardowns/Vape_ASIC/vape_asic.html

A toaster ASIC… Maybe that's what I could have done with Butterfly Labs[1] Jalapeno (sic, no ñ) devices I was given, all laser-etched with "WARRANTY VOID". They could only do SHA256(SHA256(x)), and man did they put out a lot of heat. Reportedly, the chip was unusually dense and took a long time to validate. I'd have needed to alter the thermal throttling behaviour in the firmware, I suppose. [1] Yes, the one that was…

My grandmother has a toaster from 1958 that has the smoothest glide function I have ever witnessed on a toaster.

The toast doesn't pop up, it floats up, quietly. You have to pay attention to is so your toast doesn't go cold because it is so stealthy.

It broke after a few years of use way back in the day, roughly 1960 or so, as the story goes) and my granddad fixed it, losing a few screws from the toaster in the process, but it has worked for 63 years since its repair without a single fault or flaw.

I can guarantee that this is an entirely mechanical toaster, analogue only, no chips or ASICs involved, and no toaster you can get your hands on in the great wild world will toast better toast more elegantly than this one.

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#356

Post by JohnFen »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #166
3cats-in-a-coat wrote: post #103

I actually love this, and I bookmarked it. Why? Not just because of nostalgia. Web 1.0 sites had a different set of UI idioms, which seem unintuitive to us, as we're too set in our new ways now. If you get past the fact they're ugly by modern standards, you'll see these sites accomplishing amazing results through startlingly simple means. It's an excellent source of inspiration, and if you combine those ideas with mo…

I still don't believe modern we design is actually preferred by the masses. Ofen times it isn't even a balance between aesthetics an clarity, because the modern pages are broken or otherwise unusable. It has gotten to the point where I wonder if maybe I'm not neurotypical. I'll take sites formatted like Craigslist 100% of the time. Now I'm just waiting for windows OS to fully replace file navigation text with iconogr…

> I still don't believe modern we design is actually preferred by the masses

I have no idea what the masses prefer, but Web 1.0 tends to be better for me in terms of conveying information and ease of use.

And I'm one of those weirdos who literally could not care less about how pretty a site is.

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#357

Post by JohnFen »

alex-moon wrote: post #252
alister wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But then you start trying to get actual work done, and the Fisher Priced interface is too simplified. That's exactly my thinking as well. To give another example: This week I tried to use an iPad and an Apple Pencil for day-to-day note taking. If you handwrite 100% plain English prose like, The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog, it instantly converts it to text and corrects any typos. For simple stuff, it see…

This explains a tendency I've long had which I always assumed was just a look and feel thing. So back in 2021 I got myself a (relatively new) Blackberry. I loved it. Hardware buttons. Lots of them. I've had to upgrade to a newer Android for work reasons, and it has so many default settings I've had to turn off because they are infuriating. Pixel 7. Gestures. No standard bottom bar with the three buttons. Power button…

> Hardware buttons. Lots of them.

Losing those buttons was a pretty serious usability hit that has never been made up for with touch screens.

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#358

Post by JohnFen »

phatskat wrote: post #309
stOneskull wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how about a search engine that ranks higher the less ads there are

I get this metric but at what point is the cutoff? If a small home run website has good info and gets popular, and has to add more advertisements, do they then get deranked on the search engine that led people there?

> If a small home run website has good info and gets popular, and has to add more advertisements

More advertisements? Any advertisements make the site worse. More makes it more worse.

It's so inexpensive to have a website these days, even one that pulls in a substantial number of visitors, that it's hard to make an argument that ads are necessary to pay for hosting.

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#359

Post by phatskat »

JohnFen wrote: post #358
phatskat wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get this metric but at what point is the cutoff? If a small home run website has good info and gets popular, and has to add more advertisements, do they then get deranked on the search engine that led people there?

> If a small home run website has good info and gets popular, and has to add more advertisements More advertisements? Any advertisements make the site worse. More makes it more worse. It's so inexpensive to have a website these days, even one that pulls in a substantial number of visitors, that it's hard to make an argument that ads are necessary to pay for hosting.

Oh for sure, just a hypothetical lol. And idk maybe you write software or something that you want to keep as free as you can, so ads make it doable to sustain that. There’s any number of valid reasons to advertise, and if it’s a site for content I support I’ll probably turn of ublock so long as the ads aren’t overwhelming or obstructing

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#360

Post by pinkcan »

marginalia_nu wrote: post #347
pinkcan wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

congratulations, you've optimised a snippet that never ran – it was typed into the post form from memory

Premature optimization may sometimes be unadvisable, but in this case the optimized version uses half the memory, is two orders of magnitude faster, and doesn't let your users DOS you by triggering huge file reads on each request.

> uses half the memory

this is false

> two orders of magnitude faster

incorrect

> doesn't let your users DOS you by triggering huge file reads on each request.

I understood what you were trying to do on your first reply – "Prolly don't want to read the file on every request though" – no need to repeat yourself.

plese remember:

1. it's pseudo code, the optimisation is superfluous

2. it never ran, the optimisation is useless

Post reply on HN