this post was submitted on 04 Jun 2025
1358 points (98.4% liked)

People Twitter

7238 readers
1042 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.
  6. Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Everyone lamenting this needs to check out neocities, or even get into publishing your own website. Even if it's on a "big evil" service like GoDaddy or AWS, whatever. As long as it's easy for you. Or learn to self host a site. The internet infrastructure itself is the same, but now we have faster speeds, which means your personal sites can be bigger and less optimized (easier for novices and amateurs to create). People still run webrings, people still have affiliate buttons, there's other ways to find things than search engines, and there's other search engines than the big ones anyways.

There are active communities out there that are keeping a lot of the old Internet alive, while also pushing it forward in new ways. A lot of neocities sites are very progressive. If you have an itch for discussion, then publish pages on your website in response to other people's writings, link them, sign their guestbook.

Email still exists. I have a personal protonmail that I use only for actually writing back and forth to people, I don't sign up for services with it aside from fediverse ones. People do still run phpbb style forums, too. You'll find some if you poke around the small web enough.

A lot of these things are not lost or dead. They just aren't the default Internet experience, they're hard to find by accident. But they are out there! And it's very inspiring and comforting.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Its not that there is a shortage of these spaces, its that they are not popular. I'm not sure they ever were popular amongst the general public though, to be fair. Personally I think its okay to have a somewhat small community.

[–] mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Yes, I like it smaller! Ideally you have a sort of fractal structure of a bunch of smaller, tighter communities, which are also bound up in larger but looser communities. Then you can get the benefits of broad exposure and resource sharing from large communities, as well as the benefits of meaningful individual engagement and respectful kinship from smaller communities. I think that personal sites along with forums and the rest of the Internet really can do a great job of bringing this about.

As with many things, the responsibility ultimately lies on the individual to protect themselves and resist falling into bad patterns. Most primarily, maintaining your small community takes effort, and it's much easier to just be a passive part of a very large community that subsists on infrequent uninvested involvement from many people. It's even easier to be part of a "community as a service" like Facebook, Instagram, Tiktok, etc. where all the incentives behind community building responsibilities have been supplemented with real income or fame. But of course then the people making posts, suggesting ideas, steering trends, managing communities, etc. are all in it for reasons that are not necessarily aligned with the well-being of community members. Hence the platform becomes a facade of a healthy community. Really good community upkeep seems to need to be done out of a love for the community, and any income you collect is to support that, rather than the other way around. But love for a community is often not sufficient fuel to power someone to serve huge groups out of the goodness of their heart, when they don't even know 99% of the members. Not to mention that even if someone really is that altruistic and empathetic, the time and resources become unfeasible. So ultimately, a fractal model or an interleaved model seems to be the only one that could work.

Don't get me wrong. Large communities are awesome in their own ways and have their own benefits. They have more challenges, though. Ultimately the best way to build a good large community is by building a good small community.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Would you say all of that is true for communities outside in the real world? Ive a theory that groups can become so large the negatives nearly always outweigh the positives but I haven't really had time to think it through entirely.

[–] mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 7 hours ago

I do think the real world has some differences that make it more difficult. Mostly that whoever is coordinating the larger groups is very likely to have access to more power and resources and therefore is corruptible. And then that's one of the systems that brings about that Pareto distribution sort of imbalance among people. Some inequality in terms of power is not destructive, but too much is almost guaranteed to end badly. But online, the sort of power and resources that are accrued are ultimately just less likely to eventually reach a point of being able to exert full control over the smaller layers of the community. I mean sure, someone could start acting despotic with their own "fiefdom" as another commenter aptly put it, like has sometimes happened with open source repositories or forums, but it's hard for someone's website to get so popular that they're somehow able to directly force changes upon your website (not impossible, I know).

[–] HugeNerd@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 day ago

I always look back to the 1960s visionaries and their charmingly naive ideas about the future use of computers.

I suspect that if they could have seen the actual future they would have become plumbers.

[–] RickyRigatoni@retrolemmy.com 17 points 2 days ago

Rage bait attention seeking absolutely was a thing back then, it was just severely limited and localized.

[–] blind3rdeye@lemm.ee 41 points 2 days ago

On the early days of the internet, I found a website about a comic I like. I emailed the person who made the website. I told them that I liked the site, and I sent them a game that I'd made (which had nothing whatsoever to do with the comic or their site). They tried the game and said it was fun...

That kind of interaction can never happen any more. Money has ruined it. Scams and monetization, everywhere, making everything into manipulative toxic sludge.

[–] thatradomguy@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

Why do people never mention anything other than YouTube? DailyMotion is trash now but was around then. Veoh was another good one. There were so many other video streaming platforms before YouTube's reign. Some forums still exists. Before Spotify, there was several music streaming platforms also and I'm not talking about LimeWire. playlist.com was legit before and GrooveShark was the Spotify before they decided to kill it off because couldn't profit. So many cool things before capitalism ruined them (e.g. Skype).

[–] RadioFreeArabia@lemmy.cafe 21 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The Internet was even better before 2001. Around 2002 is when paywalls started becoming a thing along with the increased enforcement of the DMCA.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yeah, I remember when I first got access to the internet in the 90s and it was mostly forums and whatnot run by hobbyists. Finding stuff was a bit tricky, but Yahoo was largely usable to find stuff. Wikipedia didn't exist, but encyclopedia brittanica or whatever was a thing and worked somewhat okay online. Pictures bigger than a thumbnail loaded like a slideshow on dialup, but text was responsive, and text-based online games were becoming more and more common.

[–] AreaSIX@lemm.ee 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yahoo search? Alta Vista ftw

Lycos was also pretty rad.

[–] Sunsofold@lemmings.world 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

We need to just ban advertising. The free with ads model is toxic to humanity.

[–] MiDaBa@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ads are fine relatively speaking. Its the data brokers that are the real problem

[–] Sunsofold@lemmings.world 1 points 1 day ago

Data brokers wouldn't exist without ads. The whole reason companies collect info on people is to better manipulate them into buying products.

[–] kandoh@reddthat.com 22 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Feels like we're all old men whose country was conquered

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ZMonster@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Pardon me, but Friendster was for friends - Myspace was for tricking people into listening to Nickelback.

[–] aramova@infosec.pub 6 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Goatse is what killed friendster imo

[–] Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee 6 points 2 days ago

You're the man now, dog!

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 31 points 2 days ago (2 children)

It's a bit more nuanced. Trolling and ragebait absolutely was a thing, but there was still a certain sense that it was just part of the Wild West nature of the internet. Someone posting racist garbage on a phpBB would be a minor irritant that would catch a bit of flak but be otherwise ignored.

These days it's entire office blocks full of professional trolls armed with advanced analytics, profiling systems and AI paid to push political agendas. And the most frustrating part of it is that despite the fact that everyone knows this to be true, it's still working anyway and we have elected officials of ostensibly Developed countries repeating obvious bullshit they saw online.

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago

Trolls actually saw themselves as an art from. Everyone else saw them as annoying cretins.

I agree with your comment.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] capuccino@lemmy.world 156 points 3 days ago (20 children)

It was capitalism. Proves that they would sell to you the rope to hang them.

[–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 days ago

they would sell to you the rope to hang them.

They would sell you a subscription for the rope nowadays.

[–] n3m37h@sh.itjust.works 65 points 3 days ago (6 children)

Capitalism ruins everything, just look at America

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (18 replies)
[–] kersploosh@sh.itjust.works 136 points 3 days ago (10 children)

90's internet was awesomer. It was simple and chill and small. We hand-wrote our silly little HTML pages and freely published our email addresses. I once mailed some random person a check to pay for a piece of shareware. They were the true halcyon days of the internet.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] irelephant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 days ago

The fediverse is similar enough for me :)

[–] sandflavoured@lemm.ee 21 points 2 days ago (4 children)

It really doesn't need to be this way.

At any time, we can decide to open our own blog for $9 a year. At any time we can choose to ditch algorithmic socials.

If we don't like them, we don't need to use them, and just switch off.

[–] nibbler@discuss.tchncs.de 19 points 2 days ago (7 children)

you can publish independently, but it's hard to get found. Search engines are cluttered with nonsensical link farms these days :-(

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 7 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Gemini is trying to bring that back.
Although it may not be technically the best approach, the 56k vibe is there.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ArchmageAzor@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

I think those old forums dedicated to discussions and interests are still there. The internet has been urbanized and now most people live in large cities, but some people still live in small towns in the countryside.

[–] HugeNerd@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 days ago

I'm so old I remember webrings.

[–] Wilco@lemm.ee 6 points 2 days ago

The corporations could not get their heads wrapped around the internet at first. They needed to deal with nerds and computer geeks to get anything done. These same people that they had kicked around and laughed at for being useless now had to be brought into boardrooms for product discussions. Then the dot com crashes happened and corporations learned that all of those people were not Steve Jobs and Bill Gates. All of these gave the internet an extended era that felt a bit like the "Wild West". AOL internet was a commercial product that got mauled constantly because it hired average skilled programmers, the really ingenious programmers were the ones developing Instant Message based "punters" and program crashing email "bombs".

[–] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml 12 points 2 days ago
[–] kandoh@reddthat.com 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Women used to post sexy photos of themselves just for the joy of getting a few people's attention.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] frenchfryenjoyer@lemmings.world 40 points 3 days ago (15 children)

I miss old YouTube so much it hurts omg. i miss how it wasn't about engagement, branding, money or camera quality, it was about broadcasting yourself and having fun. now it's become a bland corporate shell of what it used to be and half of my recommendations are AI slop lol

source: I'm so old I remember when YouTube vids were rated with stars and everyone had neon channels with funky text

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.works 60 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Whomever wrote this had to have been a child during that time because this doesn’t describe the internet I saw.

The 1990s internet was closer to this fantastical notion.

[–] GamingChairModel@lemmy.world 38 points 3 days ago (6 children)

No, 1990s internet just hadn't actually fulfilled the full potential of the web.

Video and audio required plugins, most of which were proprietary. Kids today don't realize that before YouTube, the best place to watch trailers for upcoming movies was on Apple's website, as they tried to increase adoption for QuickTime.

Speaking of plugins, much of the web was hidden behind embedded flash elements, and linking to resources was limited. I could view something in my browser, but if I sent the URL to a friend they might still need to navigate within that embedded element to get to whatever it was I was talking about.

And good luck getting plugins if you didn't use the right operating system expected by the site. Microsoft and Windows were so busy fracturing the web standards that most site publishers simply ignored Mac or Linux users (and even ignored any browser other than MSIE).

Search engines were garbage. Yahoo actually provided a decent competition to search engines by paying humans to manually maintain an index, and review user submissions on whether to add a new site to the index.

People's identities were largely tied to their internet service provider, which might have been a phone company, university, or employer. The publicly available email address services, not tied to ISP or employer or university, were unreliable and inconvenient. We had to literally disconnect from the internet in order to dial into Eudora or whatever to fetch mail.

Email servers only held mail for just long enough for you to download your copy, and then would delete from the server. If you wanted to read an archived email, you had to go back to the specific computer you downloaded it to, because you couldn't just log into the email service from somewhere else. This was a pain when you used computer labs in your university (because very few of us had laptops).

User interactions with websites were clunky. Almost everything that a user submitted to a site required an actual HTTP POST transaction, and a reloading of the entire page. AJAX changed the web significantly in the mid 2000's. The simple act of dragging a map around, and zooming in and out, for Google Maps, was revolutionary.

Everything was insecure. Encryption was rare, and even if present was usually quite weak. Security was an afterthought, and lots of people broke their computers downloading or running the wrong thing.

Nope, I think 2005-2015 was the golden age of the internet. Late enough to where the tech started to support easy, democratized use, but early enough that the corporations didn't ruin everything.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Zink@programming.dev 20 points 2 days ago (3 children)

There was no better internet than going to college in the late '90s. You go from a 56Kbps modem with hundreds of milliseconds of latency being a GOOD setup, to being directly on a 10Mbps LAN with everybody else in your class. It was right before Napster started and people were sharing entire discographies of MP3s via network file share from their own machines.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Enfors@lemm.ee 17 points 2 days ago (5 children)

Well... the type of stuff we long for are still around, it's just that we don't visit it as much anymore. Lemmy is a perfect example of this - it's around, it's better, but people still default to Reddit instead.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Naich@lemmings.world 56 points 3 days ago (13 children)

Self hosting and federated social media. Take back control. Fuck the corporations.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago

Between SEO and Googles own bullshit finding information online feels like trying to find the milk in a supermarket or the exit in a casino, designed to make you pass through as much bullshit that's completely unrelated to what you actually want as possible.

[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 23 points 2 days ago (17 children)

this is exactly what i said to a friend today

actually, in a few years, maybe the young people won't spend their time on instagram, because it's all bots anyways. maybe then the young people will enjoy living outside of their screen-devices again, and physical life could get a revival.

load more comments (17 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›