[HN Gopher] The Death of the Web (2024)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The Death of the Web (2024)
        
       Author : mark_mcnally_je
       Score  : 60 points
       Date   : 2025-02-13 20:39 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (garry.net)
 (TXT) w3m dump (garry.net)
        
       | eimrine wrote:
       | Governments did this.
        
         | Kovah wrote:
         | Corporate greed did this.
        
           | compiler-devel wrote:
           | They both did, but governments enabled corporations to do it.
        
             | RGamma wrote:
             | How would government realistically preserve a (in
             | hindsight) fragile cultural phenomenon? OTOH a ~difficult
             | mandatory PC/internet operator's license might have done
             | it.
             | 
             | Now that reminds of the weird Internetfuhrerschein
             | ("internet driver's license") courses for nontechnical folk
             | in Germany. Though these were entirely optional and so not
             | cool.
        
               | fragmede wrote:
               | archive.org could have been a government funded
               | initiative by the librarians. (not libertarians)
        
               | RGamma wrote:
               | That wouldn't have prevented tech bros from hijacking the
               | cultural momentum or commoditizing attention. Even a
               | maximum fidelity web archive would drown in the noise
               | just the same.
        
           | codr7 wrote:
           | It's basically the same thing in western countries these
           | days.
        
           | szundi wrote:
           | Homo sapiens did this
        
             | codr7 wrote:
             | More importantly, _we_ allowed it to happen.
        
           | kh_hk wrote:
           | We did this.
        
       | hyperhello wrote:
       | Once something becomes about the money, it's going to be about
       | the money.
        
         | PaulHoule wrote:
         | TANSTAAFL [1]
         | 
         | One of my collaborators would say we got seduced by the idea
         | that it wasn't about the money. That is, it was cheap enough
         | that we could go for a while without thinking how to pay for
         | it, then the advertising model looked like an answer.
         | 
         | Early on one would make the comparison to advertising on TV,
         | radio, magazines and such. Little did we know that personalized
         | advertising would lead to something much worse. I mean, Proctor
         | and Gamble, who gave us the soap opera, has been around since
         | 1837. Do any of the big YouTube advertisers like all the fake
         | food companies or the scam supplement subscription companies or
         | Established Titles expect to be around in 2 years?
         | 
         | If people had been thinking about how to pay for it from day
         | one we'd be in a different place.
         | 
         | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_such_thing_as_a_free_lunch
        
           | imglorp wrote:
           | Yes, that's where we went wrong.
           | 
           | I feel that early on, we should have had the foresight to
           | press the microtransaction option much harder. There could
           | have been a widely adopted standard where you load your
           | browser or UA with money and then individual sites visited
           | could be given permission to debit some amount per page load,
           | hour consumed, or whatever. I would rather pay a few cents to
           | read an article or watch a video than have surveillance
           | capitalism ruin everything for everyone. It's not about the
           | ads, it's about the ecosystem.
        
             | giantrobot wrote:
             | That sounds just as bad if not worse than what we have
             | today. You'd have to outright pay for your hardware,
             | electricity, connectivity, and then on top pay for every
             | piece of content. Browsing would suck as there would only
             | be bad mechanisms for previewing content before deciding to
             | access it (and being charged). Enshittification would still
             | happen just like with cable television and video streaming.
             | You'd have to pay for access but then still have ads and
             | tracking on top.
        
             | makeitdouble wrote:
             | Credit card payment security was in a dire state, and EC
             | wasn't even really a thing yet, so paying anything online
             | was just a huge barrier.
             | 
             | Even in retrospect I'm not sure what monetisation would
             | have been widely accepted in 1990.
        
             | jmathai wrote:
             | Sounds like Brave Attention Tokens [1]. It might have been
             | a hard sell 3 decades ago when we didn't realize it would
             | turn out like it has.
             | 
             | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brave_(web_browser)#Busin
             | ess_m...
        
             | flir wrote:
             | Ever heard the expression "bad money drives out good"?
             | 
             | Free content drives out paid-for content. It would only
             | take a tiny percentage of sites going ad-supported. All the
             | users would rush to them, the microtransaction sites would
             | see this, and they would soon change their models.
        
             | monday40 wrote:
             | Or, since we pay for access to the internet, let's say like
             | $80 per month for home connection, plus $20 per month for
             | phone data, and the internet providers know the websites we
             | visit (in Australia they have to keep this information for
             | 2 years), and can approximate how much time we spend there,
             | they could redistribute part of the $100 (50%?) to the
             | website owners automatically.
        
           | cobertos wrote:
           | I'm not sure mandatory payment could have worked when the
           | internet brought down the cost of publishing, which has only
           | continued to drop.
           | 
           | Not to mention the incentives to create a way to distribute (
           | _cough_ pirate) paid content to people who do not want to
           | pay. That would have broken the system from the start. Some
           | software nerd somewhere would 've figure that out.
        
         | agumonkey wrote:
         | There's money/profit, but there's also society. before
         | facebook, the web was a virtual space of pseudos, when reality
         | (real name, places, pictures) started to leak in, suddenly
         | things get serious. you can bully, impersonate, steal/toy-with
         | personal information... rapidly problems occur and need for law
         | and morality follows suit.
        
       | nerflad wrote:
       | Boiling take: Myspace doesn't get enough historical heat for
       | walling the blogosphere while simultaneously Eternal-Septembering
       | it.
        
         | tehwebguy wrote:
         | A slice of my MySpace experience:
         | 
         | Before MySpace web designers and developers could have work all
         | year just working with bands. Band web work basically dried up
         | below a certain band success level over a year or two.
         | 
         | But since MySpace allowed custom CSS and had limited built in
         | design options it created a new market for custom pages. The
         | rates were mostly lower but there were probably 100X the number
         | of bands that needed work.
        
       | jmathai wrote:
       | HN hug of death - https://archive.is/ylzrL
        
       | Fizzadar wrote:
       | Garry used to run/host the Facepunch forums which strongly remind
       | me of better times on the web. They were good times.
        
       | jmathai wrote:
       | Not every was around when the web was obscure. It's hard to
       | explain how magical that time was. The pinnacle of the web for me
       | was Audio Galaxy. A website where you could find new music to
       | download and even push music to your friend's computer (using the
       | Audio Galaxy Satellite app) [1].
       | 
       | I spent so much time in IRC rooms and discussion forums. It
       | wasn't doom scrolling. No one was trying to manipulate me for my
       | time or money. Perhaps you can think of it like going down a
       | rabbit hole of Wikipedia articles. But there were so many people
       | sharing so many unique perspectives - some I became friends with
       | and many of those remain today.
       | 
       | I felt something like neocities might recapture that feeling. I
       | haven't put in enough time to see if that's the case. I do hope
       | that for a future generation that they get to experience
       | something like the very early web ... it truly was remarkable.
       | 
       | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audiogalaxy
        
         | TechDebtDevin wrote:
         | I imagine people will have the same nostalgia for doom
         | scrolling one day ;)
        
           | unethical_ban wrote:
           | We'll have the same nostalgia for being able to travel
           | anywhere without our location and emotions catalogued by
           | government databases analyzing us for threats to order.
        
             | smb06 wrote:
             | Or assigning a national security threat score if we like
             | too many Chinese tik tok videos
        
           | RGamma wrote:
           | Or nostalgia for better nostalgia.
        
       | thomassmith65 wrote:
       | The web is a garbage ecosystem now.
       | 
       | The sad thing is that it would take only about twenty of you
       | people, you who came across this post on HN today and are now
       | reading this comment, to build an alternative ecosystem.
        
         | nolroz wrote:
         | Hat tossed!
        
         | krapp wrote:
         | They did, it's called gemini: https://geminiprotocol.net/
        
           | fragmede wrote:
           | Where they're coming from is great but as someone unfamiliar
           | with what it is (needs a name change in the face of Google
           | Gemini) that landing page isn't a moving introduction to the
           | project. (hint: The FAQ page is for follow-up questions
           | _after_ I 've been told what the thing is and I have
           | questions, not to tell me what the thing is)
        
             | thomassmith65 wrote:
             | Gemini's inspiration was the "gopher" protocol from the
             | early 1990s. Gopher was a text-only precursor to the web -
             | plain text with highlighted clickable text links. If you've
             | ever used an ancient library computer (green and black
             | display), their UI was essentially the same as gopher.
        
               | fragmede wrote:
               | it's not their fault Google came along and used that
               | name, but they did, so here we are.
        
               | krapp wrote:
               | To be fair, names based on Greek and Roman mythology were
               | overplayed back when NASA was using them. Calling
               | anything "Gemini" is about as uncreative as one can get.
        
           | thomassmith65 wrote:
           | I actually considered linking to gemini in my comment!
           | 
           | The reason I didn't is to avoid a discussion of how I
           | _personally_ would design tools for an alternate web. I think
           | gemini is a step in the right direction, but not enough to
           | supplant the web for a large enough minority of users. Not
           | that it takes many users - the web was vibrant in 1995 with
           | 100x fewer people on it than today.
           | 
           | I don't know that the specific qualities I _personally_ would
           | want for a web replacement are the right ones for everybody,
           | but I would add to the philosophy of gemini some sort of
           | control - not necessarily centralized - to curb commercial
           | activity and abuse. To attract users, it would also need more
           | cultural cache than Gemini. There wouldn 't be much content
           | on it at first - unless its design found a loophole to
           | facilitate piracy - so its early adopters would need to feel
           | like they were part of some exclusive community.
        
           | agumonkey wrote:
           | I loved the idea, but after testing a bit, I found it was too
           | alienating (coming from someone who likes ed, sed and vi).
           | Especially the searching / browsing ergonomics. Maybe there
           | was some news there ?
        
         | aklemm wrote:
         | 20 engineers are going to solve misaligned incentives and bot
         | automation?
        
           | thomassmith65 wrote:
           | 20 people would have an impossible time trying to fix the
           | existing web because they would be up against FA*NG companies
           | etc.
           | 
           | But if 20 people design an alternate system (protocol,
           | browser, security features, etc) from scratch, and their
           | incentives are right, yes they could come up with decent
           | protections against users with bad incentives and against
           | bots.
        
       | hylaride wrote:
       | I feel everything in this article as somebody who first got
       | online when I was 13 in 1994. In those days you got bullied for
       | being "good at computers" (especially in the rural area I grew up
       | in) and the communities formed on IRC and early multiplayer
       | gaming networks were a lifesaver. Many websites were written by
       | college students who essentially "blogged" their newly discovered
       | free lives, which was so appealing to my teen-aged self.
       | 
       | It's cliche to malign mass market consumerism, but it really is a
       | lowest common denominator phenomenon. I feel like the internet
       | has made grifting so scalable that it's getting more and more
       | difficult to consume.
        
       | datadrivenangel wrote:
       | This is from the Garry of Garry's Mod (GMOD) fame.
        
       | reidrac wrote:
       | I was reading the post and pop-up on the bottom appeared:
       | 
       |  _An error has occurred. This application may no longer respond
       | until reloaded. Reload_
       | 
       | The death of the web, indeed.
        
       | tboyd47 wrote:
       | I tend to think Section 230 is what caused this, and repealing it
       | can unravel everything back to how it was in 1996. Yet people act
       | so protective over it.
        
       | throw7 wrote:
       | For me the start of the decline is when Netscape went under.
       | Billy @ Microsoft threw his weight around and IE dominated
       | (sigh). The final nail in the coffin is when mozilla suite was
       | torn apart and the browser was renamed Seamonkey. No really.
       | "Seamonkey" is what was decided.
       | 
       | I do look back at the early 90's with nostalgia. Too bad you can
       | never go back.
        
       | RyanOD wrote:
       | I often feel this way about a lot of things where I was present
       | during the genesis moment. Then I remind myself that I'm getting
       | older and likely misremembering what it was really like - fun and
       | exciting, but not very useful.
       | 
       | Moreover, I feel like this perspective fails to acknowledge
       | everyone globally who benefits massively from simply having
       | access to information I take for granted - even if it is
       | surrounded by ads.
       | 
       | Lastly, I get that the proliferation of apps for tangible goods
       | is frustrating, but there is an answer...just don't purchase that
       | item! I've passed on loads of purchases because I don't want
       | another app. I once went to a Mariners game and forgot I had my
       | Leatherman in my pocket. Understandably, they wouldn't let me in,
       | but told me I could use a nearby locker which required I install
       | an app. I gave my ticket to someone else and walked back to work.
       | No big deal.
        
         | fuzztester wrote:
         | >Lastly, I get that the proliferation of apps for tangible
         | goods is frustrating,
         | 
         | I had the same experience with a mobile service provider that I
         | use, recently.
         | 
         | since the last few days, the USSD code that used to work to
         | find my prepaid recharge expiry date, so that I could recharge
         | again in time, does not work. it doesn't even give a proper
         | error message. it just suddenly exits, and tell me to install
         | an app for that purpose.
         | 
         | mobile self service / IVR features are brain dead, and don't
         | work a lot of the time anyway. I don't know what the reason is,
         | except stupidity.
        
       | Maconha wrote:
       | they've been pushing this version of the Internet on us forever.
       | first compuserv, then aol, yahoo, Google, FB, now x/tiktok.
       | everything gets ruined once it goes critical mass. we loved those
       | days because it was pure freedom. choose your own adventure. now
       | we get force fed crap we never asked for.
       | 
       | we didn't need to monetize anything. you need power, a computer,
       | and a connection, that's it. that's not too hard to pay for. they
       | printed a bunch of money and created things we didn't need or
       | want. .com bubble my ass. how much of those trillions over the
       | years have actually produced value? nay, it was an easy way to
       | build wealth and suck up printed money while they on-boarded
       | users who will never know those times but always silently long
       | for them. who was it that said be careful who you give your power
       | to?
        
       | stevage wrote:
       | I have a theory that part of why you don't see such great niche
       | sites now is that they were the productive of cognitive surplus.
       | People had spare brain power and not that much to do with it, so
       | they built and contributed to fun sites.
       | 
       | Now, FB and YouTube and Tiktok etc have gotten very good at
       | consuming all that free time and energy.
       | 
       | Just a theory.
        
         | nicbou wrote:
         | They have become good at capturing that surplus. People are
         | still doing amazing things, and these platforms give them the
         | tools to publish videos, an audience, and monetisation
         | opportunities. However the platforms giveth, then taketh away.
        
       | MarioMan wrote:
       | The wild thing is that the web has achieved both the aspirations
       | and the failings mentioned here. There's an odd dichotomy of user
       | experiences.
       | 
       | Progress really has accelerated. "Big data" couldn't have been a
       | thing without the Internet. Science through improved
       | communication is advancing more rapidly than ever before. Just
       | look at how quickly things change today vs. 100 years ago in all
       | aspects of life.
       | 
       | Knowledge is everywhere, you just need to know where to dig to
       | work around all of the junk. You no longer need to take up an
       | apprenticeship to understand the basics of a given job, and
       | knowledge as a whole is more accessible than ever before.
       | 
       | We really can communicate with people all over the world. The
       | Internet is always active, because users from across the globe
       | are always online.
       | 
       | The Internet has accelerated globalism. People can readily expose
       | themselves to outside ideas and perspectives, so long as they
       | take the effort to step outside of their algorithm-prescribed
       | interest bubbles every once in a while. You can make friends on
       | the other side of the planet and communicate far easier than you
       | could ever send letters or pay for long-distance phone calls.
       | 
       | People still make their own websites. I'm sure there are more of
       | them then there ever were in the '90s, they're just significantly
       | harder to surface in the deluge of the modern Internet.
       | 
       | Ads, pop-ups, and modals are only experienced by people that
       | don't know about worthwhile ad/nuisance blockers.
       | 
       | Ultimately, the Internet is filled with _more_ content rather
       | than strictly _better_ content than ever before. Though as a
       | consequence of more, it means there 's also more great knowledge
       | and more likeminded subcultures available than ever before, but
       | you need a certain kind of discipline to actively work to find
       | it. This is why I feel that information literacy is one of the
       | most important life skills: if you can find the "good stuff",
       | discriminate fact from fiction, and dig deeper than an AI-
       | generated Google summary of search results, then you have the
       | means to learn and develop talents in just about anything.
        
       | gloomyday wrote:
       | The death of the Internet was so insidious. I guess I trusted too
       | much that what people built would remain the same. Once a few
       | players took over their respective niches, they opened up a
       | Pandora Box of ways to make money.
       | 
       | I miss finding niche forums where we saw a number of very active
       | members, and we could distinguish them. There was often great
       | care curating their content. These communities have been
       | concentrating on Reddit, and I don't like it.
        
       | fuzztester wrote:
       | does anyone remember MyWay or Neoplanet?
       | 
       | the former was a website / pre-social-media-but-like-it site,
       | with an email service, iirc, and the latter was a web browser.
       | 
       | I used them for a while, I thought they were good for a while.
       | after that I don't remember what happened. they probably shutdown
       | sometime later.
       | 
       | but they were interesting at the time.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-02-13 23:02 UTC)