Author Topic: The internet in 1990 -- holy smokes! (Read 16309 times)

zridling · « **on:** May 03, 2011, 05:09 AM »

I was there, and I don't remember the graphics, just the text. But man did that suck!
http://www.dailyeo.c...he-internet-in-1990/

mrainey · « **Reply #1 on:** May 03, 2011, 10:20 AM »

Some of that stuff seemed pretty neat at the time. Wonder where we'll be twenty years from now.

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #2 on:** May 03, 2011, 11:30 AM »

Wait-a-minute, 1990 was 20 years ago?!? Damnit!

Now I feel old...

40hz · « **Reply #3 on:** May 03, 2011, 12:35 PM »

Some of that stuff seemed pretty neat at the time. Wonder where we'll be twenty years from now.
-mrainey (May 03, 2011, 10:20 AM)

Most likely in a tightly regulated, moderately taxed, and heavily monitored info-place largely dominated by commercial interests, government-sponsored propaganda, religious ranting, and political agendas.

Oh yeah... and with better and faster graphics and media.

Does anyone really expect it to be any different? I mean honestly now.

nudone · « **Reply #4 on:** May 03, 2011, 12:42 PM »

if the gazooba-net isn't being piped directly into my brain in 20 years from now i'll be very disappointed.

40hz · « **Reply #5 on:** May 03, 2011, 02:53 PM »

if the gazooba-net isn't being piped directly into my brain in 20 years from now i'll be very disappointed.
-nudone (May 03, 2011, 12:42 PM)

And I'll be...relieved.

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #6 on:** May 03, 2011, 03:00 PM »

if the gazooba-net isn't being piped directly into my brain in 20 years from now i'll be very disappointed.
-nudone (May 03, 2011, 12:42 PM)

And I'll be...relieved.

-40hz (May 03, 2011, 02:53 PM)

You worried you'll click on the wrong thing and end up with a dirty mind?

superboyac · « **Reply #7 on:** May 03, 2011, 03:12 PM »

Some of that stuff seemed pretty neat at the time. Wonder where we'll be twenty years from now.
-mrainey (May 03, 2011, 10:20 AM)

Most likely in a tightly regulated, moderately taxed, and heavily monitored info-place largely dominated by commercial interests, government-sponsored propaganda, religious ranting, and political agendas.

Oh yeah... and with better and faster graphics and media.

Does anyone really expect it to be any different? I mean honestly now.
-40hz (May 03, 2011, 12:35 PM)

Soooooooo depressing. A rapidly diminishing middle class. The standard of living in the city will decrease significantly. Fewer "american dream" opportunities. Much less freedom of speech from a social pressure standpoint. The quality of education will be bloated and poor in general, and financially much more prohibitive than Americans are used to. Just wait until the double-dip recession hits. Wait until that bailout money starts diffusing into the system at large. That's going to be scary. Very depressing stuff.

cyberdiva · « **Reply #8 on:** May 03, 2011, 03:20 PM »

1990? Where did all those graphics come from? My screen was text only for several more years.

mrainey · « **Reply #9 on:** May 03, 2011, 04:02 PM »

Just wait until the double-dip recession hits. Wait until that bailout money starts diffusing into the system at large. That's going to be scary. Very depressing stuff.

And, your degree is in ...... ?

zridling · « **Reply #10 on:** May 03, 2011, 05:32 PM »

In 20 years, we better have a holodeck that runs 24/7. When that day comes, I'm seriously checking out of this reality for good.

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #11 on:** May 03, 2011, 05:48 PM »

In 20 years, we better have a holodeck that runs 24/7. When that day comes, I'm seriously checking out of this reality for good.
-zridling (May 03, 2011, 05:32 PM)

Sign me up, Scotty...

superboyac · « **Reply #12 on:** May 03, 2011, 05:57 PM »

Just wait until the double-dip recession hits. Wait until that bailout money starts diffusing into the system at large. That's going to be scary. Very depressing stuff.

And, your degree is in ...... ?
-mrainey (May 03, 2011, 04:02 PM)

I don't understand your point. Do you really want to know my degree (engineering) or are you trying to say I'm not qualified to say such things?

mrainey · « **Reply #13 on:** May 03, 2011, 06:41 PM »

I don't understand your point. Do you really want to know my degree (engineering) or are you trying to say I'm not qualified to say such things?

I'm asking what qualifies you to say such things with any credibility.

Deozaan · « **Reply #14 on:** May 03, 2011, 06:58 PM »

I don't understand your point. Do you really want to know my degree (engineering) or are you trying to say I'm not qualified to say such things?
I'm asking what qualifies you to say such things with any credibility.
-mrainey (May 03, 2011, 06:41 PM)

You don't need a degree to be educated on a topic. And in my opinion, most of the so-called experts with the "correct" degree(s) who are paraded around on TV aren't very credible.

40hz · « **Reply #15 on:** May 03, 2011, 07:48 PM »

I don't understand your point. Do you really want to know my degree (engineering) or are you trying to say I'm not qualified to say such things?

I'm asking what qualifies you to say such things with any credibility.

-mrainey (May 03, 2011, 06:41 PM)

Anyone with enough education to understand and interpret numbers, examine evidence, observe trends - and think - is eminently qualified to speak with credibility on economics. In many respects, that set of skills (not exactly uncommon in the general population) goes far beyond the education and qualifications of many of the elected representatives who make decisions and pass legislation on such economic issues.

@mrainy - is there any particular reason for the confrontational tone of your comment?

Renegade · « **Reply #16 on:** May 03, 2011, 07:57 PM »

It seems to me that every discipline has issues that it cannot address from inside, and that someone outside needs to address the issue. This is the same sort of thing Godel addresses when he talks about true propositions that are not provable within the system and another system being needed.

Computing has this problem a lot of the time when you see how developers get excited about adding features, but what users need is something else. Developers see one thing that others don't, and vice versa.

In the same way I think the field of economics/finance suffers from the same sorts of problem. (My take on it is that they're blinded by the term "efficient" [as in "efficient markets"] and seriously need to rethink their entire approach because it's not working - if it were, we'd not have a major crisis every X years.)

My qualifications are that my formal training is in logic.

mrainey · « **Reply #17 on:** May 03, 2011, 09:27 PM »

@mrainy - is there any particular reason for the confrintational tone of your comment?

Actually, my original question (your degree is in .... ?) is just an expression that I've heard off and on throughout my adult life. It was intended as a gentle "how do you know that?" sort of question. Should have used a smiley.

Beyond that, I guess I'm just burned out by non-stop economic "plans" coming from talking heads on the Internet and TV. Put a hundred economists in a room, get a hundred different opinions, many of them motivated more by politics than by reason.

No offense intended.

Renegade · « **Reply #18 on:** May 03, 2011, 10:19 PM »

Beyond that, I guess I'm just burned out by non-stop economic "plans" coming from talking heads on the Internet and TV. Put a hundred economists in a room, get a hundred different opinions, many of them motivated more by politics than by reason.
-mrainey (May 03, 2011, 09:27 PM)

And that is the sad part...

40hz · « **Reply #19 on:** May 04, 2011, 07:07 AM »

Actually, my original question (your degree is in .... ?) is just an expression that I've heard off and on throughout my adult life. It was intended as a gentle "how do you know that?" sort of question. Should have used a smiley.
-mrainey (May 03, 2011, 09:27 PM)

My apologies for being such a prickly New Englander.

Up in my neck of the woods, that phrase is most often used to suggest a person is clueless about the subject they're holding forth on. It's also occasionally used as a substitute for "stfu."

Different places, different meanings I suppose.

Put a hundred economists in a room, get a hundred different opinions, many of them motivated more by politics than by reason.
-mrainey (May 03, 2011, 09:27 PM)

It is interesting that they call it a science. All the trappings are there: the weighty tomes, the research, the vocabulary, the mathmatical models and formulas, the institutes, the conferences, the professorships and endowed university chairs...in short, everything any other science has except accurate predictions and repeatable outcomes.

If you're a professional economist I'd suspect it's starting to get a bit embarrassing...

iphigenie · « **Reply #20 on:** May 04, 2011, 02:17 PM »

I still thing the internet from today, especially social media, has a lot to learn of the ecosystem of these old days - especially usenet. Features we had in newsreaders to find, save, organise posts - filters, killfiles, saving, collate into collections - are sorely missing from . And some of the idioms of the days could do with a revival (standard format for collections, finger, plan files, geek codes) perhaps as microformats

We have more problems with noise, trolls, fame-seekers, topic hijacking, fakeries etc. now than we had then, and the way communities had evolved to handle it could be useful patterns even now

nudone · « **Reply #21 on:** May 04, 2011, 02:44 PM »

If you're a professional economist I'd suspect it's starting to get a bit embarrassing...
-40hz (May 04, 2011, 07:07 AM)

Well said. The highest paid practitioners of pseudo science on the planet. No better at predicting the economic future than staring at sheep's entrails.

Maybe I just mean bankers - but I'm sure they follow all the latest trends in economic theory.

zridling · « **Reply #22 on:** May 04, 2011, 03:07 PM »

I still think the internet from today, especially social media, has a lot to learn of the ecosystem of these old days - especially usenet. Features we had in newsreaders to find, save, organise posts - filters, killfiles, saving, collate into collections - are sorely missing from.
-iphigenie (May 04, 2011, 02:17 PM)

Have to agree there. Usenet is so efficient. Not designed to be pretty, just efficient. Too bad more people didn't build better newsreaders over the past two decades. NewsLeecher was/is the bomb.

40hz · « **Reply #23 on:** May 04, 2011, 03:08 PM »

I was there, and I don't remember the graphics, just the text. But man did that suck!
-zridling (May 03, 2011, 05:09 AM)

I was there too. And I don't remember those graphics either. Although my memberships were with The WELL, Compuserve, and Delphi - so maybe I missed something (yeah right!) by not having a Prodigy account?

But I didn't think it sucked at all. I liked the pure text environment.

When AOL first came out, I (along with most of my recycled BBS cohorts) was skeptical and scornful of all the graphical 'junk' being displayed. 'Real' online users were hard core text and keyboard command aficionados. To paraphrase Boromir in The Fellowship of the Ring: Our online service has no graphics. Our online service needs no graphics!

And we all called AOL, along with it's pretty client software, a passing fad suited only for small children and those that were unable to read.

In the immortal words of Rod Stewart: "Look how wrong you can be."

40hz · « **Reply #24 on:** May 04, 2011, 03:41 PM »

I still thing the internet from today, especially social media, has a lot to learn of the ecosystem of these old days - especially usenet. Features we had in newsreaders to find, save, organise posts - filters, killfiles, saving, collate into collections - are sorely missing from . And some of the idioms of the days could do with a revival (standard format for collections, finger, plan files, geek codes) perhaps as microformats

We have more problems with noise, trolls, fame-seekers, topic hijacking, fakeries etc. now than we had then, and the way communities had evolved to handle it could be useful patterns even now
-iphigenie (May 04, 2011, 02:17 PM)

Oui, je suis d’accord.

I think you're spot on about the benefits to be gained if the internet users copied the best practices that came out of Usenet community development. Because that might provide the community that Usenet had - and most of the web lacks.

To some extent, most of our current community problems could be expected however. Because the web and Usenet came into existence in very different ways.

Usenet participants developed a sense of community because they were actively involved in bringing Usenet into existence. They were participants rather than simple users. But such large-scale community development doesn't seem to happen very often on the web. Most of today's internet is released as a fully developed experience which is then 'sold' to a target audience.

As a result, much of the web has devolved into a form of interactive entertainment, designed for an audience rather than as a vehicle to serve as a source of community. Some of the more successful ventures (Twitter, most MMORPGs, etc.) have succeeded in bringing about a faux community experience of sorts. But these "user experiences" have more in common with affinity groups or poker clubs than they do with the classic notion of an online community.

I guess you could say that that the reason a sense of community is so sorely lacking is because there's not a global community for the web like there was for Usenet.

And there's also a lot of truth to the adage: Nothing good ever survives being discovered.

The Native Americans probably felt much the same way when they realized the whole world would soon becoming to their shores.