Using the internet like it's 1999
50 points by joshuablais 2 hours ago | 21 comments

vunderba 2 hours ago
If it were 1999, most people would still be browsing the web on their US Robotics 56k modem (at best). This page is about 1 MB of assets (500kb gzip compressed if your browser supported it) , so it would have taken at least a minute just to finish loading.
reply
icedchai 12 minutes ago
I got my first cable modem in 1998! All sites were still built for dialup, so everything was incredibly fast.
reply
boudin 60 minutes ago
Closer to 2 as it was rarelly running at full 56kb/s.

Although, being patient was part of the experience as well

reply
Loughla 57 minutes ago
I was a lot more careful about clicking things when it took a full minute to load. Now I know that it'll be open in less than a second and I can leave immediately if I need to, so there's WAY less thinking beforehand.
reply
mdb333 45 minutes ago
so true, re: patience

I was just thinking back the other day about BBS days and how frustrating a busy signal could be, or connection time limits, etc.

reply
alex1138 19 minutes ago
Yeah, but you know something? Flash worked damn near perfectly even on potato connections
reply
joshuablais 59 minutes ago
and 1MB is "small" for the modern web!
reply
zahirbmirza 2 hours ago
How can we solve this problem, of the current state of the internet, without reverting to the compromises of the past? This has been on my mind for a while. The layer of trash some companies have built over the internet has been ruinous.
reply
joshuablais 58 minutes ago
I theorize it is going back to the protocol layer. The "web" for most people is a bunch of social media frontends.
reply
abraxas 33 minutes ago
Yeah, it's quite sad where we landed. Circa 2004-2006 while the internet was mostly open and accessible I mentally grouped "the internet" into two buckets. There was the real web plus usenet plus email and then there was "facebook" with its weird garden wall and exclusive invites or some such shit. I didn't think of facebook as being "on the web" even though they used the http protocol. It was highly unusual then to have any web content behind a registration wall.

So hardly anyone considered facebook to be a part of "the web". It was its own weird duck. Twenty years later and most people only frequent this "weird" part of the internet - this limited ensemble of paid and unpaid walled gardens.

reply
hdgvhicv 10 minutes ago
That applies to aol, msn, compuserve etc, not to Facebook which you only ever accessed via http from a browser.
reply
abraxas 5 minutes ago
Yeah, those didn't count either. AOL and compuserve were not even available outside the USA in the late nineties. With AOL I'm quite sure nobody considered them to be a part of the web. Their pages didn't have URLs early on but AOL "keywords" instead. Compuserve also weren't using http I believe. It was some kind of commercial WAN that was pitched as a competitor to the internet, no?
reply
GaryBluto 34 minutes ago
I'm not opposed to the message but it perplexes me the amount of people who bemoan the loss of the "old web" and then use a web page comprised of massive modern frameworks to deliver said message.
reply
kyledrake 36 minutes ago
> On your router, you can and should setup blocklists for various malicious and nefarious domains, advertisements, adult content, etc. This is not “1999-esque” in practice, but is a requirement for the modern web.

I worked on a Geocities archive restoration. There was a boat load of porn (including illegal porn), malicious domains, spamvertising, malware, predators, political extremists, etc on the 1999 web, and you can find all of it within the raw Geocities archive that was made before it shut down. The idea that the old web was some kind of pure place of innocence is a weird and factually inaccurate take. If anything, the late 90s web was more dark than it is now, perhaps in part because nobody had any idea of how to police anything on it and things like PhotoDNA didn't exist yet.

If anything, my work on 90s site archival has taught me that the web has always been a place with a lot of dark places, and the narrative that the old web was some sort of pure innocent place that became evil is not matched by evidence.

It's just as plausible to me that the general "misbehavior" of humans on the internet hasn't changed all that much, but that we have, frankly, adopted a more puritanical and intolerant approach towards it. Nobody was talking about getting rid of Section 230, carding people for 18+ before they could use IRC, and Congress wasn't dragging evil Geocities CEO David Bohnett into grilling sessions where they were accusing him of hooking kids on digital cigarettes. Perhaps it would be wise to have a little nostalgia for some of that too.

reply
alex1138 20 minutes ago
Hey Kyle! Neocities is great
reply
pjmorris 24 minutes ago
I feel like 'Party like it's 1999' could become the slogan for a movement. Sure, the tech was a little less convenient, but overarching control was also less hard-wired into everything.
reply
Terr_ 2 hours ago
To me the what we wanted/got distinction is something like:

1. A kind of capital that is widely available, so that people could exercise control and agency with machines that do what you want them to do for your own needs.

2. A distribution tool controlled by mega-corporations as they decide what you should be able to see or have.

reply
jakedata 56 minutes ago
Just go to fark.com, a lingering glimmer of light from before the dead web. They are still aggregating human curated news and hosting reasonably civil discussions.

Then buy a Totalfark subscription so they don't need to bend over backwards to show more ads just to keep the lights on. See ya there!

reply
pixel_popping 2 hours ago
OpenAI will love this article, noM nom nom
reply
t1234s 2 hours ago
The best was the FTP search feature from alltheweb.com. You could find almost any software you needed.
reply
thot_experiment 51 minutes ago
I don't know if I'm crazy but I think social media is pretty okay at the like, core building and enhancing social networks thing.

Instagram is probably my most used one these days and I love seeing my friend's stories and I don't think I've parsed more than a handful of ads in the last 2 or 3 years that I've been an active user, probably a few tens of hours wasted with dumb reels, not a bad cost at all imo. I have probably 400 irl people and 200 internet accounts I follow. It doesn't have the charm and honesty of navigating a webring or whatever, but the friction is so low so I get to see a lot of stuff my friends, acquaintances and especially just people i'm peripherally in community with share that I probably wouldn't otherwise.

I miss the old internet for sure, but I'm not convinced the current situation is as horrible as people say.

reply