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

Where did the old web go? We followed 657,607 links to find out

0.mk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 231 posts

Re: Where did the old web go? We followed 657,607 links to find out

#161

Post by rustcleaner »

ChadNauseam wrote: post #8
shevy-java wrote: post #5

Webpages dying is probably one of the biggest design flaws of the original web. I am not saying old content needs to be preserved forever, but so much content has factually been lost over time. Old logs from text-based MUDs for instance, even for MUDs that still exist today.

The technology is still in its infancy unfortunately, so there's no way the web could have been based on it, but I think content-addressing is the long-term play. If I click a link, there are some cases where I want the server to respond with a fresh response just for me (e.g. a website showing the weather). But often I just want whatever content was linked to (e.g. a webpage explaining a math content). In the latter…

Sounds like Hyphanet (aka Freenet).

Re: Where did the old web go? We followed 657,607 links to find out

#162

Post by onion2k »

sodapopcan wrote: post #135
tavavex wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't live long enough to see the entire lifetime of HN, but it's definitely part of the old web in my book. Its functionality is the same it's always been, it's rock solid, lightweight and simple. No personalization or engagement maximizing, no modern-style ads. Being spun off from something as big as Y Combinator meant they can run this site almost indefinitely.

The only thing not "old" about it is upvoting, which is one of those YMMV features.

I have fond memories of Slashdot in 1998. It was the spiritual forerunner to HN, and had upvoting, and in a more complex form as there were categories of votes. I got lots of +5 Funny comments. Hard to imagine, isn't it.

Re: Where did the old web go? We followed 657,607 links to find out

#163

Post by rustcleaner »

juleiie wrote: post #63

Old web was kind of dumb anyway. You can put on the rose tinted glasses and feel elite about browsing some shitty site 20 years ago or enjoy the fruits of modern design.

>... or enjoy the fruits of modern design

Those fruits are fermented enough to score a DUI.

Re: Where did the old web go? We followed 657,607 links to find out

#164

Post by spockz »

zem wrote: post #122
monk_grilla wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're participating in it right now. HN is a living example of a simple website facilitating discussion between humans with a shared interest. That's why I come here more than any other news/social site now.

what would be amazing would be a resurgence of the old style forums, but where users could choose to see a flat or tree view of a discussion (and even customize those views, e.g. the tree could be reddit style without subject lines, or slashdot style with them)

SwedeSpeed has this. It is a forum, posts have threads. It isn’t always nice because the threading/three view also breaks the sense of time and makes it harder to see new posts.

I actually prefer a linear view with posts that quote what they want to reply to. This also allows a single post to reply and combine multiple remarks. So it allows more for convergence instead of divergence as with a tree.

Re: Where did the old web go? We followed 657,607 links to find out

#165

Post by prmoustache »

juleiie wrote: post #142
prmoustache wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> or enjoy the fruits of modern design. Like web pages that load slower with high speed fiber than the old web did on 56k and ISDN connections?

If I want to read a book I have my e reader not a browser. Give me something good. hit my eyeballs with some pigments

Oh you are just mistaking gopher for the old web.

Re: Where did the old web go? We followed 657,607 links to find out

#166

Post by darkwater »

mattkevan wrote: post #65
bradley13 wrote: post #34

2009-2014? That's not the old web. Or I'm old. Take your pick.

I’m old and it’s definitely not the old web. I consider the old web to be when PNGs were sliced with Fireworks and laid out in tables. 2009-2014 is Web 2.0, back when people still thought social media was a good idea.

PNGs are new, not old.

Re: Where did the old web go? We followed 657,607 links to find out

#167

Post by sebastiennight »

apsurd wrote: post #154
tavavex wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have seen. Too late to edit it now...

havent lived. “I didnt live long enough” means your life ended! past tense. hasn’t means its still going “have not (yet)”. I don’t know the formal rules behind it all though. its interesting because it sounds more correct to use have not yet because your life is still going on but its going on in the forward direction, not backwards in time to overlap an earlier HN state. So you could say its not right, but the sente…

> your life is still going on but its going on in the forward direction, not backwards in time to overlap an earlier HN state

Wouldn't the proper tense be "I won't have lived long enough to see the entire lifetime of HN" then?

> We like that you are still here with us.

Same here, and it feels like a very "old web" kind of feeling, as we're expressing this empathy towards an anonymous stranger with a very deemphasized username.

I find it surprising how much empathy has seemingly been on a decline as the Web went from anonymity to pseudonymity to everyone's full name and face being attached to their online presence.

Re: Where did the old web go? We followed 657,607 links to find out

#168

Post by x______________ »

MetaWhirledPeas wrote: post #80

Here's a contrarian timeline: maybe the old web will return? My reasoning: when the "old web" was great, most people thought the internet was for nerds. Sure even casual users would forward funny emails to their friends, but when it came time for news most people would read the paper or watch the nightly broadcast. When they paid for their Big Mac they'd lay down cash. There were plenty of people using the internet,…

> And then what you have left will be a small subset of people who know how to reach their desired corners of the internet, just like before.

Blue skies mentality. The old web was good because it wasn't crowded or accessible to most, and everything was new. That, great filter, was unique and will never happen again; Pandora's box is open and cannot be shut.

Pretty much akin to one's childhood being yearned at old age...

Re: Where did the old web go? We followed 657,607 links to find out

#169

Post by radarsat1 »

ErigmolCt wrote: post #149
tavavex wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't live long enough to see the entire lifetime of HN, but it's definitely part of the old web in my book. Its functionality is the same it's always been, it's rock solid, lightweight and simple. No personalization or engagement maximizing, no modern-style ads. Being spun off from something as big as Y Combinator meant they can run this site almost indefinitely.

HN is a good example of how little a website actually needs once you remove the requirement to constantly squeeze more engagement out of it. Though to be fair, its audience is unusually self-selecting :)

I don't know much about how HN is run but I think it would be a mistake to underestimate the need for human moderation here, and I assume that is a lot of work.

A message forum is simple, old technology. Keeping it usable and useful for humans is not.

Post reply on HN