[HN Gopher] Every time you click this link, it will send you to ...
___________________________________________________________________
Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web
1.0 website
Author : thunderbong
Score : 401 points
Date : 2023-07-15 19:03 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (wiby.me)
(TXT) w3m dump (wiby.me)
| tachyon5 wrote:
| I stumbled upon this one, worthy of HN: how to construct your own
| analog Pong game -
| http://searle.x10host.com/TeleTennis/PWTennis.html
| [deleted]
| tgv wrote:
| Damn, if we wait a little bit, the copyright on some of these
| websites will expire.
| xwowsersx wrote:
| Love this. Web 1.0 sites were eminently readable. Shame how bad
| sites have gotten. Here's one I landed:
| http://londonbusroutes.net/
| CharlesW wrote:
| The brutalist/undesigned style is an interesting vibe, but
| there are very simple things that could be done to radically
| improve information architecture and readability without
| sacrificing minimalism.
| furyofantares wrote:
| It's not too bad if you read it on an 800x600 monitor.
| paxys wrote:
| They had their charm, sure, but messy table-based layouts,
| fluorescent color schemes, scrolling text and flashing gifs
| aren't exactly what I would call readable. Give me Web 0.1
| instead (black text, white background, maybe 5 lines of
| styling).
| sylware wrote:
| Did, you know? Html table for layout are not harmful (screen
| reader can go thru them). HTML 2D document instead of 1D
| document.
|
| You add basic (x)html forms on top of that, you can do wonders,
| without a big tech web engine (no surprise from them pushing the
| web to work only in their engines...).
| transformi wrote:
| Are those pages are generated? (got to say the look authentic but
| it not that hard to make those...)
| 3cats-in-a-coat wrote:
| 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 modern design, but keep it minimal, I believe there's
| a lot of potential to create something compelling.
|
| This is the same reason for which I like reviewing old OS GUIs,
| old apps and even UIs in movies sometimes (but not the modern
| take which just slaps animated circles and gradients on
| everything, I mean actual UIs showing something readable/usable).
| JJMcJ wrote:
| Once in a while you hit a really ancient site that is CSS free.
| Like the original CERN sites.
|
| They seem strange but navigation is usually absolutely clear
| and they are lightening fast.
| jonplackett wrote:
| This is really quite addictive
| clsec wrote:
| Love it, this _did not_ trigger _any_ of my security add-ons!
| graftak wrote:
| Except that most of these appear to be served over http, sans
| s.
| lkramer wrote:
| Is that an issue if nothing confidential is being served?
| graftak wrote:
| It's prone to MITM attacks and it allows snooping for what
| pages are visited. Some US ISPs use(d) this vulnerability
| to inject ads into pages. On a public/shared network you
| might be vulnerable to automated attacks.
| user32489318 wrote:
| How long would US ISPs need to stop doing this, now that
| most stuff is HTTPS delivered anyways?
| rndmwlk wrote:
| Strange stuff, some old internet art.
|
| http://www.teleportacia.org/war/
| init0 wrote:
| It was https://geouniversal.neocities.org/ for me :D
| [deleted]
| pinkcan wrote:
| I guess I got lucky as it sent me to:
| https://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/
| bilekas wrote:
| I kind of miss the old web. Not for it's design asthetic but for
| it's purpose. Every site seems solely focused on the info.
|
| Contrasting today, it feels like everyone wants to look and feel
| that same.
| ttoinou wrote:
| Loved that website http://blackpeopleloveus.com/
|
| > We are well-liked by Black people so we're psyched (since lots
| of Black people don't like lots of White people)!! We thought
| it'd be cool to honor our exceptional status with a ROCKIN'
| domain name and a killer website!!
| [deleted]
| tech-historian wrote:
| Apparently that site was created by (now-famous)
| comedian/actress Chelsea Peretti.
|
| https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=125566&page=1
| itsmemattchung wrote:
| The testimonial section is absolutely hilarious:
|
| > Sally always says things that make me feel special, like:
| "You're so cool, you're different, you're not like other Black
| people!"
| rhplus wrote:
| I was curious who would pay to keep a joke domain name and
| website up for 20+ years, and it turns out it's Chelsea Peretti
| (Brooklyn 99) and her brother Jonah Peretti (Buzzfeed and
| HuffPo).
|
| https://www.avclub.com/read-this-in-2002-black-people-love-u...
| furyofantares wrote:
| I thought that was her at the bottom!
| imiric wrote:
| This is reminiscent of StumbleUpon, which I used to spend hours
| on finding interesting sites in the aughts. Reddit later filled
| that void, but it was always a good time stumbling upon some
| obscure gem of a site.
|
| Now it's some app abomination, but I still think there's a place
| for such a service.
| brandrick wrote:
| I loved StumbleUpon.
| petetnt wrote:
| It's awesome how you can stumble upon sites that are so funny or
| interesting (in multiple ways) that you just want to share them
| immediately forward. Everyone says it but it's true: something
| just got lost in translation when social media pages ate the
| whole internet.
| Youden wrote:
| My theory is that it's that on many of these sites there's no
| easy way to comment, like or otherwise publicly interact. Sure
| you could try and email the person but that takes effort and
| you have to talk directly to them, not to a crowd.
|
| When you don't have to worry about a mob of negativity, you can
| write far more freely.
| mulmen wrote:
| They didn't eat the entire Internet. They didn't even eat the
| web. They set up parallel walled gardens. The web is still
| there. Personal websites just don't scale to the masses. This
| is fine and probably for the best.
| RGamma wrote:
| What I've found consistently scarier this past decade+ is the
| casualness and seeming inevitability with which vast swathes of
| the population can be captured by unfavorable technology and
| social spaces or narratives.
|
| And yeah, what you and others here often enough describe(d) are
| the shadows on the wall. Keeping civilization and culture on
| track really is a constant struggle.
| mulmen wrote:
| Vast swaths of the population are uninteresting rubes.
| Reddit, Facebook, and Twitter are all doing us a favor by
| keeping those people occupied and their drivel contained.
| RGamma wrote:
| The _MSM /MEM as population control vehicle/idiot honeypot_
| is a salient angle though you quickly get into self-
| fulfilling prophecy stuff there. Perhaps it's me being
| overly pessimistic, but I too might have been captured by
| the mind-rot matrix if I had grown up with that shit, never
| knowing what was or could be.
| mulmen wrote:
| The web isn't going to help there. Crackpots made
| websites too.
|
| You aren't responsible for what other people do. Just
| live your own life.
| elashri wrote:
| It gave me this antique website [1] about decades long collection
| of chemistry lab equipments. I really enjoyed that
|
| [1] http://www.antique-microscopes.com/chemistry/
| seizethecheese wrote:
| Is this the first webcam?
| https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/coffee/coffee.html
| cratermoon wrote:
| Yes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trojan_Room_coffee_pot
| insane_dreamer wrote:
| I much prefer the era of thoughtful (or at least deliberate)
| updates to static websites in the earlier Web rather than the
| firehose stream of hot takes (90% BS) we have today with social
| media
| hk__2 wrote:
| > I much prefer the era of thoughtful (or at least deliberate)
| updates to static websites in the earlier Web rather than the
| firehose stream of hot takes (90% BS) we have today with social
| media
|
| There are probably a lot more thoughtful updates to static
| websites today than in the earlier Web; I doubt that the people
| who had static websites in the earlier Web are the same who
| post hot takes on social media.
| gus_massa wrote:
| @thunderbong : Are you the author? People like to make some
| technical questions if the author is here.
|
| What is the tech stack? How do you identify the Web 1.0 sites? Is
| it automatic or a manual list? Are you filtering NSFW sites?
| thunderbong wrote:
| Nope, I'm not. Just found it interesting and posted here!
| gus_massa wrote:
| Following the links posted by dang, it looks like the author
| is https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=ehonda
| marginalia_nu wrote:
| I'm not the author, but here is the tech stack, and it is if I
| understand correctly manually curated.
|
| https://wiby.me/about/guide.html
| eshack94 wrote:
| Ant farm website that it took me to: https://zimage.com/~ant/
|
| Thought this was pretty neat!
| mynameishere wrote:
| Here's something to strive for: The "Aloha Award":
| https://www.lavasurfer.com/awardpages/award-aloha-guidelines...
|
| Oh, wait, dammit:
|
| _You cannot apply directly for our Aloha Award. It is only
| granted to the top websites which win our Pau Hana Award. (Only
| about 5% of Pau Hana Award-winning sites go on to win the coveted
| "Aloha Award")._
|
| Pretty rigorous for a website that specializes in the history of
| breakfast food spokestoons.
| willhackett wrote:
| I had a great IPT teacher in high school who open sourced his
| class plan on http://wonko.info.
|
| Hit site was inspired by old mud games. It's meant to be fun and
| educational.
|
| There's also some micro sites on there where he tried to win
| worst website awards.
| rwky wrote:
| It took me here https://greem.co.uk/otherbits/jelly.html Nailing
| jelly to a wall: is it possible? Which I think is HN worthy in
| its own right. Also the author of that page and I have the same
| toaster.
| IshKebab wrote:
| I feel like I need a more comprehensive explanation of
| jelly/jam. So jam is the same in both countries? What is jelly
| in America then?
| ficklepickle wrote:
| Wikipedia to the rescue!
|
| > jelly (from the French gelee)[29] is a clear or translucent
| fruit spread made by a process similar to that used for
| making jam, with the additional step of filtering out the
| fruit pulp after the initial cooking.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_preserves#Jelly
| ethbr0 wrote:
| > _I conducted this experiment as a little diversion in the
| lazy few weeks between finishing my final year exams at
| university and graduating, back in June 2005._
|
| Everything about that page screamed "I'm bored in a dorm." Nice
| to know my college-dar is still accurate.
|
| Also, it would have been nice to test with flat masonry nails.
| I.e. not round shank.
| eshack94 wrote:
| Focus DIY, one of the stores that the author states his
| materials were sourced from, has been defunct since July 2011.
| Just to add some context to when this experiment might have
| taken place.
|
| Edit: I see the page's copyright date is 2005, so it's probably
| safe to assume that's when the original experiment took place.
| effingwewt wrote:
| Once the question was posed I _had_ to know!
|
| This whole thread ia brilliant, I do miss the old web.
| mulmen wrote:
| The "old web" is still there, as evidenced by this page and
| the submission. We didn't lose anything. New things just came
| and made more noise. You can still set up a static HTML site
| in an afternoon.
| remkop22 wrote:
| Lovely.
|
| > _This page is copyright 2005 by Graeme Cole. What are you
| allowed to do with it? Pfft. Anything within the realms of
| common sense, really. I don 't want to prescribe rigidly what
| people can and can't do with it, so I've decided on a
| benchmark. It's this: you're allowed to do with this page
| anything you wouldn't mind me doing with your cat. So yes, you
| can photoshop it for comedy effect, you can copy bits of it for
| illustrative purposes and so on, but you can't steal it and
| pass it off as your own._
| drhagen wrote:
| I was going to say the man invented CC-BY before there was
| CC-BY, but apparently, the first CC licenses came out in
| 2002.
| catach wrote:
| Pretty sure the value of the CC licenses isn't that they
| invented any particular set of restrictions and freedoms,
| but that they applied enough lawyer energy so that the
| wording of those sets would be compatible with law systems.
| DakotaR wrote:
| As opposed to 'crayon' licenses that make up their own
| terms and cause legal uncertainty
| SeanAnderson wrote:
| _> Further research into the area might involve the nailing to
| the wall of a stronger jelly mix. Alternatively, the "wall"
| could be placed, nails first, into the jelly while it's
| setting, to allow the jelly to set around the nails. Then in
| the morning the bowl can be removed, leaving the jelly nailed
| to the wall._
|
| Ahaha, but also, hmmm... _thinking_ would it actually work if
| you allowed the jelly to set around the nails?
| qingcharles wrote:
| Tell me more about this toaster. How well does it make bread go
| brown?
| rwky wrote:
| You had to ask and apparently I have nothing to better to do
| on a Saturday night. It's a Russell Hobbs Model 5569, it says
| it has a "microchip" inside. If I was to hazard a guess it's
| at least 25 years old (the post is 18 so sounds reasonable).
| It actually fits a piece of toast, even thick pieces or
| crumpets which a lot of modern toasters don't. It does
| require the toast flipping since it does one side more than
| the other but that's not a hardship. A single flip on about
| "2" does a nice golden brown.
| bragr wrote:
| Browsing these has made me realize the main benefits of modern
| web design is probably responsive layout. Some of these site hold
| up, but some really don't depending on how you browse them (ultra
| wide desktop vs smaller window vs mobile). Certainly you could
| fix some of the worst issues with classic html tricks but you'd
| have to made tradeoffs.
| ryandrake wrote:
| I really hate it when web sites deliberately constrain their
| content to a tiny vertical column down the middle of the
| browser window. I have a 27 inch wide screen display. I paid
| for the whole 27 inches of the thing. When I stretch my browser
| window across it, I expect the web site content to fill it. I
| don't expect the site to fill 2/3 of it with white space.
|
| Yea, I have heard the whole "research shows, people can't read
| long horizontal lines of text" excuse. Blah blah blah. Don't
| care. If I find myself having trouble reading a long horizontal
| line of text, I can easily... [brace yourself for this one]
| resize my browser window! Let the user decide.
|
| If you (the web developer) really feel like you just have to do
| something different when the browser window is too wide for
| your sensibilities... maybe divide the content into columns or
| something. Anything but useless white space.
| omgmajk wrote:
| Some things were better in the past, not a lot of things, but
| some things.
| CapTinKneeMow wrote:
| [flagged]
| dec0dedab0de wrote:
| I love this. Does anyone know how the list was compiled? I would
| suspect a custom web crawler that only indexes sites using
| certain tags. Which makes me wonder if there are any sites that
| would qualify with the exception of a modern js advertisement
| someone slapped on. I
| thunderbong wrote:
| As @marginalia_nu replied to another comment [0], here's the
| info [1]
|
| [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36740261
|
| [1]: https://wiby.me/about/guide.html
| ysxoz wrote:
| [flagged]
| ysxoz wrote:
| [flagged]
| kofesmolotkom wrote:
| This is incredible and such a nostalgia. I landed here, haha:
| http://juliestudio.com/rangers/romance.html
| susam wrote:
| What is really fascinating about these old websites is that
| they are still up and running. The content in the link you
| posted is over two decades old. But they are still paying the
| money for the domain name and keeping the website alive!
| silisili wrote:
| I got https://www.iqtestforfree.com/
|
| and must say, that's the most accurate online IQ test I've taken.
| superkuh wrote:
| Another way to find web 1.0 websites is to browse with Javascript
| on temporary whitelist only. Any JS dependent modern site will
| fail to display and you can safely close the tab knowing it was
| commercial crap anyway.
| matricaria wrote:
| What exactly marks the difference between Web 1.0, Web 2.0 and
| Web 3.0? I read these terms all the time, is there a good
| explanation?
| varjag wrote:
| xmlHttpRequest
| adra wrote:
| 1.0 was mostly static web pages with content changes largely
| driven by manual page updates to static web resources. This was
| the era where most sites were powered by an httpd host.
|
| 2.0 was when databases and ajax (JavaScript async) started to
| take over as a web content delivery form. Often content
| delivery moved from semantic page navigation flows to "single
| page applications" where the client state was often held client
| side and pushed to the server when asking for new content.
|
| 3.0 is the marketing term for crypto based projects that are
| trying to sell "a brand new web" where there are no longer
| centralized services providing content, and somewhere it all
| gets glued together with crypto forgetting that most of the
| modern web users are running on cell phones with limited cpu
| and more importantly battery constraints. It's also part of a
| proud group of technologies that garnered a catchy marketing
| term to describe the movement before the practical
| implementations emerged (much unlike web 1.0, 2.0 before it).
| [deleted]
| glenstein wrote:
| I fully agree that 3.0 is the marketing term for
| decentralized cryptobro stuff, but isn't it also a term that
| tentatively belonged to a more generic idea of a regular web
| that iterates beyond web 2.0?
| tunesmith wrote:
| I don't think there is, because even here there is disagreement
| about whether a web server that returns html and css without
| using NodeJS is 1.0 or 2.0.
| cratermoon wrote:
| The boundary is fuzzy, as others have pointed out. If there's
| one specific technology that serves as a definite boundary it's
| the use of XMLHttpRequest in javascript running on the browser,
| later dubbed "AJAX", which is short for Asynchronous JavaScript
| and XML.
|
| It was first implemented (non-standard) around 2001 in Windows
| 2000, Outlook and IE 5. Subsequently other browsers (Mozilla in
| particular) adopted it and it became a _def facto_ standard.
|
| Not every site the uses/used Ajax is fully Web 2.0, but they
| are definitely not 1.0. The affect on web development was
| transformative, resulting in "DHTML", or Dynamic HTML. Webmail,
| for example, in the gmail, first released in 2004, you see a
| fully Web 2.0 site. You might say it's the beginning of what's
| called the Single Page Application. At a time when the average
| home internet connection was still pretty slow over dial-up,
| eliminating most round-trips was a game-changer.
| CalRobert wrote:
| Not sure, but table-based layouts, no css, and being made with
| no concern for monetization are hallmarks of a 1.0 site.
| CrzyLngPwd wrote:
| 1.0 - just normal web stuff 2.0 - better 3.0 - betterer
| marginalia_nu wrote:
| Web 1.0 is any website with the doctag <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC
| "-//SoftQuad Software//DTD HoTMetaL PRO
| 6.0::19990601::extensions to HTML 4.0//EN">; it's frames based
| designs, table based layouts, blink tags and under construction
| gifs.
|
| Web 2.0 is the transition from _homepages_ and _webmasters_ to
| _content_ and _platforms_ , users are producing the content and
| platform owners get rich off ads. It also coincides with the
| shift to AJAX and web applications that had logic in the front-
| end, but this isn't really part of the actual definition.
|
| Web 3.0 was briefly the semantic web. It didn't really take off
| and was largely forgotten when the cryptobros relaunched the
| term. New Web 3 is all about using decentralization,
| blockchains and cryptocurrencies and NFTs to somehow solve the
| problems with Web 2.0.
| ohxh wrote:
| As far as I understand, web 1.0 is browser makes a request ->
| backend delivers some html, with subsequent requests just for
| css/images/iframes. This also had a characteristic style with
| layouts made from tables and simple but busy designs. Web 2.0
| is many of the web apps you see today, where you don't need to
| load a page to fetch new content, but instead asynchronous
| JavaScript grabs it and edits the html -- think gmail or Google
| maps. Web 3.0 is unclear to me, but it seems like most people
| who use it refer to decentralized or peer to peer applications
| and crypto.
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| pavlov wrote:
| Today it's primarily a load of nonsense that cryptocurrency
| promoters use to make people want to buy tokens related to some
| useless website which has no users except the other token
| holders.
|
| Back in 2005, "web 2.0" was a marketing term meant to indicate
| optimism that dynamic web applications could transcend the
| economic disappointments of the dot-com boom and bust. It was
| always nebulous and poorly defined, and the only reason we're
| talking about "web 2.0" almost two decades later is the
| aforementioned crypto promoters.
| [deleted]
| Waterluvian wrote:
| There's no concrete delineator. You kinda know it when you see
| it. Some common things for Web 1.0 though:
|
| - usually no or minimal javascript
|
| - minimal CSS, leaning on default styles
|
| - feels like a passion project by one person or a small group
|
| - design is usually minimal and completely lacking in any
| "techniques" used to manipulate you
|
| - usually isn't trying to sell you anything
| BlackRockEyes wrote:
| [dead]
| takoid wrote:
| If you enjoy this, you will probably enjoy Marginalia as well:
| https://search.marginalia.nu/
| marginalia_nu wrote:
| I do think Wiby is the superior weird shit finder. It's smaller
| but far more consistently good.
| CafeRacer wrote:
| It's awesome! Thank you!
|
| Just the other day I was thinking that 99% of things is in
| echochaimer; same dozen of companies pushing same dozen of
| narratives over then same dozen of apps and the internet is
| boring and hopeless and everything is the same now.
|
| There was a site before, that would randomly show you different
| websites based on the category of interest. But it got purchased
| by another company and turned into shit.
|
| I was missing something like that. Thank you.
| Popeyes wrote:
| http://nicejewishmom.com/
|
| OK, was not expecting that.
| susam wrote:
| There was Web 1.0. Then there was Web 2.0. Now we find ourselves
| in the era of Web Pi (3.14159). This humorous term comes from one
| of my favourite comments that I once found on HN. Quoting the
| comment from <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30139081>
| below:
|
| > _Nice read. Firm supporter of Web Pi (3.1415). When it comes to
| building for the web today, I 'm always amazed that "so much can
| be done with so little" and yet the default is the opposite - "so
| much is needed to deliver so little" - so irrational! Where did
| we go wrong? I wonder what Web Euler (2.71828) would have looked
| like?_
|
| In that same thread, I made a comment that my favourite phase of
| the web was Web Golden (1.61803). That was my attempt at
| extending their humour. Web Golden refers to the very short-lived
| sweet spot between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0. If you're looking for a
| moderate dose of nostalgia, I have elaborated that golden phase a
| little more in my blog post here: <https://susam.net/maze/web-
| golden.html>.
|
| By the way, the Wiby link on this HN story took me to this
| website: <https://www.evanmiller.org/>. Really neat website with
| an interesting collection of articles.
| tingletech wrote:
| I used to work with someone who always held that Pi was the
| ideal group size for a committee that would get any work done.
| tobr wrote:
| Three fully-committed members, and one who's about 14%
| engaged?
| BrandoElFollito wrote:
| A good university project group. Even though it is usually
| closer to e.
| hk__2 wrote:
| *A random website from a _curated list_ of what one thinks
| represents "Web 1.0". A lot of these go beyond plain HTML /CSS
| websites; for example I got one with a Flash game (emulated using
| Ruffle [1]).
|
| [1]: https://ruffle.rs/#what-is-ruffle
| tantalor wrote:
| Web 1.0 was Flash. Web 2.0 killed it.
| atothayu wrote:
| omg amazing https://www.taquitos.net/snacks.php?page_code=14
| dehue wrote:
| Wow, I was not expecting to be taken to such an interesting
| website on my first click: http://www.goodearthgraphics.com/ This
| site has an underground cave directory by state, cave virtual
| tours with photos, cave type descriptions, cave photography tips
| and much more. I may just use this website to plan my next road
| trip and explore some caves.
| reaperducer wrote:
| And half of the entries have phone numbers ending in -CAVE.
|
| Reminds me of the days when it was ordinary to memorize dozens
| and dozens of phone numbers, so one-offs had to be at least
| temporarily memorable.
| ykonstant wrote:
| I clicked once to humor the submission and already got a better
| experience than 99% of modern websites:
| http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/index.html
|
| This was with one click. Never used this before.
| shevis wrote:
| Did not disappoint
| http://www.octanecreative.com/ducttape/walltapings/
| dang wrote:
| Related:
|
| _Wiby.me: curated search engine for content-first suckless
| sites_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33373619 - Oct 2022
| (65 comments)
|
| _Show HN: Wiby is now free software_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32027177 - July 2022 (35
| comments)
|
| _Wiby: A search engine for the classic web_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25153524 - Nov 2020 (4
| comments)
|
| _Show HN: Wiby - A Minimalist's Search Engine_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23926964 - July 2020 (23
| comments)
|
| _Wiby - The Search Engine for Classic Websites_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22321743 - Feb 2020 (1
| comment)
|
| _Wiby - A Search Engine for Classic Websites_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20128680 - June 2019 (1
| comment)
|
| _Wiby - a search engine for classic web pages_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19015356 - Jan 2019 (1
| comment)
|
| _Show HN: Wiby - Search engine for lightweight, unbloated, old
| school websites_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17355218
| - June 2018 (2 comments)
|
| _Wiby - the search engine for old school websites_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16521862 - March 2018 (1
| comment)
| upmostly wrote:
| I got http://www.staggeringbeauty.com/
|
| The best possible result.
| jpcfl wrote:
| Epilepsy warning.
| techiereads wrote:
| Interesting, is code public?
| pinkcan wrote:
| import flask import random app=flask.Flask()
| @app.route('/') def random_redir(): with
| open('urls.txt') as of: return
| flask.redirect(random.choice(of.readlines()))
| tryauuum wrote:
| https://logological.org/girlfriend
|
| Some guy from 1998 explains why he will never have girlfriend
| jonplackett wrote:
| Anyone fancy sleuthing to find an update?
| 26fingies wrote:
| Weirdly "Writing articles about why I don't have a girlfriend"
| doesn't appear in the math
| akiselev wrote:
| I landed on the ultimate trilobite site:
| https://www.trilobites.info
|
| There are so many different forms of trilobites! A bunch of them
| actually look like prehistoric headcrabs
| guerrilla wrote:
| I really can't comprehend how web 1.0 and 2.0 are two completely
| different Earths. The new web makes me hate people to the point
| of misanthropy while the old web makes me love people and see the
| potential in the world all over again. We've got to do something
| about this. Well, I guess OP already is.
| oyoman wrote:
| I concur with your statement. Going through random sites for an
| hour, it gave me thinking back 25 years ago, when going from
| rings to rings of websites, look at them, reading the
| interesting ones and finally bookmarking them to be able to
| come back to them.
|
| A complete different way to present a personal topic and/or
| interest than the current one. Right now, it is blogs that
| trying to gather an audience for whatever purposes, commercial
| websites, social medias etc. This compared to websites that
| gathered personal interests, or one specific topic that tries
| to be self-contained.
|
| I don't know maybe it is the nostalgia, or how I have first
| interacted with the web, that brings back those contrasts.
| sebmellen wrote:
| What a delightful surprise to see Mustachio Pete!
| https://olegvolk.net/olegv/pete/
| password54321 wrote:
| Well I just took a trip through Hell http://www.fmh-
| child.org/Hellandwho.html quite fun.
| ethbr0 wrote:
| I do miss coming across stuff like this:
| https://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet/freedom.html
| user32489318 wrote:
| Remember stumbling into amateur written sci-fi stories with
| layouts like that. Downloading them to read on CRT monitor till
| late in the night, and losing them forever the next time
| windows would destroy itself.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-07-15 23:00 UTC)