Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The Tenth Birthday Of The World Wide Web

CmdrTaco posted more than 13 years ago | from the what-a-short-strange-trip-it's-been dept.

The Internet 146

UoHCIC writes: "Excerpt from at A Little History of the World Wide Web " 17 May (1991) Presentation to "C5" Committee. General release of WWW on central CERN machines." This indicates that the Web was released to the world at large on May 17, 1991." Talk about fast moving: 10 years old, and just look at all the pr0n you can snarf. Imagine where we'll be at 20!

cancel ×

146 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

20th anniversary wishlist (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#217200)

I'm hoping for arbitrary pr0n generated on-demand.

Re:2 Porn references in under 12 hours... whooo ho (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#217201)

I know this girl I can set you up with Taco. She's really smart and fun to be with :-P

Re:Imagine (1)

shogun (657) | more than 13 years ago | (#217202)

Probably not since LNUX doesn't exist now either as far as I can see.

Re:using it for good, or just using it (1)

Caine (784) | more than 13 years ago | (#217203)

I just wish your parents had chosen not to have you, but oh well, you can't get everything. There are reasons why they have that many children, primarily because it's the only thing that can keep them alive when they're older. It's also a good strategy to ensure your family lives on.

"Lack of motivation" I think they have more motivation than you will ever have. Hey...let's do it like this. I colonize your country, take you and your family as slaves, then leave, creating a power vacuum in which civil war emerges, then when your home has been burned and plundered, and you're starving to death, I'll drop by and say "Hey...if you only had some more motivation you'd be fine". How about that?

People don't set up homes on Barren Wasteland. (2)

Forge (2456) | more than 13 years ago | (#217204)

People don't set up home on Barren Wasteland. that's why the Sahara and Siberia are so sparsely populated.

However what tends to happen is that someone lives on a patch of fertile farmland which his family has maintained for centuries and suddenly someone else has a war and steals his entire crop 3 years in a row. They burn his fields and the surrounding forests which according to meteorologists reduces rainfall.

Other people dam the river that fed his field etc...

This all actually happened and what it dose is that what was a comfortable middle class village in Somalia or ethiopia 50 years ago is reduced to a few fathoms below abject poverty.

When aid workers actually arrive they tend to find people dying of starvation hundreds of miles from home because they went searching for some kind of life and found the whole country a barren war ravaged wasteland without the usual stored crops or working irrigation network to keep you through the periodic droughts.
--
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.

Re:Interesting historical note... (1)

Glytch (4881) | more than 13 years ago | (#217207)

It was the moment that Yahoo went from their Berkeley address to a .com. Anyone else remember when one would go to Yahoo to see if there was a new website up?

10 from now (1)

jjr (6873) | more than 13 years ago | (#217209)

The internet I hope will not be controled even more by the government. Yet I believe that in the future we will have more thing on the internet to do but less rights to do them.

Re:Today's question... (1)

ragnarok (6947) | more than 13 years ago | (#217210)

I was in 6th grade. Now I'm an 'Associate Software Engineer' working on multi-million dollar industrial control software. It's been an interesting 10 years :)

Re:Interesting historical note... (1)

ragnarok (6947) | more than 13 years ago | (#217211)

Three letters:
A O L

17th of MAY (1)

Dionysus (12737) | more than 13 years ago | (#217215)

Happy Independence Day, Norway!!!!

2 Porn references in under 12 hours... whooo hooo (3)

Moe Yerca (14391) | more than 13 years ago | (#217217)

CmdrTaco's bizarre references to porn are getting quite frequent... first the biofeedback joysticks and now his own personal tribute to the web.

I think it's only a matter of time till /. opens popups to poopsex.com when you try and close your browser...

They call me Moe

Re:Moore's Law of Porn (1)

Photon Ghoul (14932) | more than 13 years ago | (#217218)

Think there will be enough porn "actresses" and "models" to keep up with the demand if there's more porn sites than people (and more people that porn workers)?

Re:Let's hope it carries on getting better (2)

rde (17364) | more than 13 years ago | (#217219)

Anyone can grab an AOL CD and get online, put their web page up and chat to people across the world
Anyone with a computer can, anyway. That's still far too small a percentage of the population of any western country; taken as a percentage of the world's population, it's ridiculous.
I know that these are still early days, and the fact that the phrase 'digital divide' enjoys currency is testament to the fact that people are at least aware of the problem. But there's a long, long way to go. The web is, I suppose, a reflection of the rest of the world, and it won't be truly egalitarian until individual governments ensure that their respective populations can afford computers (and food). And we all know how likely that is in the next twenty years.

between then and now (3)

MS (18681) | more than 13 years ago | (#217220)

At about half way between 1991 and now, there are some interesting numbers:
  • (1969): birth of the Internet
  • 1991: birth of the World-Wide Web (Yes, then it was written with a "-" between the 1st and 2nd word)
  • 1993: 90% of the webbrowsers were XMosaic (running on Unix), the rest were linemode browsers and some exotic homemade browsers (I too developed one - today unfortunately unusable!)
  • 1994: 70% of all webservers run on SunOS/Solaris, the rest are HP-UX, SGI, AIX and some other Unices (no Microsoft OS on the radar)
  • 1995: 25.000.000 Internet users (now we are about 400.000.000)
  • 1996: 90% of all browsers are Netscape
  • 2001: 70% of the Internet users use MSIE
  • 2001: 75% of the webservers run on Linux or some Unix variant (still Microsoft has eaten only around 20% of the server cake)

Enjoy it!
Markus

Re:Today's question... (2)

BilldaCat (19181) | more than 13 years ago | (#217222)

how dare you list all that dial-up software without listing the king of dial-up software, that which is Telemate.

Telemate is god.

Re:and yet SOME dot coms fail (2)

ChadN (21033) | more than 13 years ago | (#217223)

Yes they have; it was even mentioned in the intro. pr0n appears to be a profitable web business for some (or many).

A backbone more than ten ago (4)

JJ (29711) | more than 13 years ago | (#217224)

Computers were certainly interconnected more than a decade ago. I courted my first wife via DARPA and she's been gone for more than a decade.

well then.. (1)

ebbv (34786) | more than 13 years ago | (#217227)


you're not very good at looking.
...dave

funny you should post that on slashdot. (1)

gimpboy (34912) | more than 13 years ago | (#217228)

i dont think rob's hurting for money currently.

use LaTeX? want an online reference manager that

netnews. (2)

gimpboy (34912) | more than 13 years ago | (#217229)

man usenet has always been the place for things like porn and mp3s. as long as it's not userfriendly enough for senators and lars to use it will remain that way.

use LaTeX? want an online reference manager that

Internet-based company? (1)

HMV (44906) | more than 13 years ago | (#217231)

No, perhaps not. And yet hundreds of companies of any size, many of whom will never be sexy enough to make Business 2.0 or the Standard, have added enormous value and productivity to their company by using this medium as a tool within a successful business model instead of relying on the medium itself as the business model.

Style sheets in '91? (1)

HMV (44906) | more than 13 years ago | (#217232)

An interesting mention about style sheets on this page [w3.org] about the NeXT browser/editor TBL was demonstrating...

Even if that wasn't in the same context as what we've come to use as CSS now, I wonder why the separation of content from presentation took so long to come around (and is STILL not 100% properly implemented by major browsers) and how it got so far off track around, say, 1996 and the 2.0 browsers.

Re:Internet-based company? (2)

nuintari (47926) | more than 13 years ago | (#217233)

exactly my point, its an enhancement, unless your a hosting company.... then it makes sense that the web if your medium.

Re:and yet SOME dot coms fail (2)

nuintari (47926) | more than 13 years ago | (#217234)

I knew I should have started a pr0n site a few years back when my old friend Renee decided she wanted to get paid to make "movies". I was sitting on a gold mine, damnit!

and yet dot coms fail (3)

nuintari (47926) | more than 13 years ago | (#217235)

its ten years old, and yet no one has discovered a viable bussiness model for the internet based company.

Re:Today's question... (1)

AnalogBoy (51094) | more than 13 years ago | (#217236)

I was still on BBS's.

I was on BBS's until they finally gave up the ghost here in nashville.

I miss BBSing. It was a much closer-knit community. I'll never forget the nights of attempting to redial my favorite bbs until i *FINALLY* got connected.. just to grab a .qwk packet and spend the next day or so replying to message after message after message..

The net just hasn't touched the same nerve with me. While the information resources are much more grand, there arent many places which offer the same type of atmosphere as a local BBS. People weren't bombarded with ads from local BBS's, it took a fair amount of clue to be able to get one one, for god sakes - Telix, Terminate, procomm, minicom and tip, bluewave and iceedit, renegade and wildcat. Modemfests and gatherings and making friends and enemies through a highly delayed message board.. memories.. *sigh*

Oh, sorry... Nostalgia kicked in.

Re:Interesting historical note... (2)

mjh (57755) | more than 13 years ago | (#217239)

what would you say was the defining moment that facilitated public consumption of the technology?

For me it was the release of a usable mosaic, and not too long after that, yahoo [yahoo.com] . I don't remember when mosaic was released, but I remember downloading it and skipping around to different people's web sites. I also remember thinking to myself that this thing was interesting but that it probably wouldn't catch on. Usenet had a nice indexing system in that there were groups identified by interest. So if you had a paritcular interest, you could find resources on Usenet by looking at the names of the groups. But there was no such mechanism with mosaic (I called it "mosaic" at the time for lack of better understanding of what drove it).

So much for my prognostication. I now predict that any predictions from me are sketchy at best. (This bit of self reference brought to you by "Godel, Escher, Bach".)

Re:using it for good, or just using it (4)

bachelor3 (68410) | more than 13 years ago | (#217240)

One of the questions [w3.org] from the presentation:

If everyone can make any links he wants, doesn't the whole thing become a hopeless mess?

yes :)

Me too (1)

lovebyte (81275) | more than 13 years ago | (#217248)

ME TOO

remember?

AOL? (2)

lovebyte (81275) | more than 13 years ago | (#217249)

I seem to remember that the web really took off and newsgroups became unusable when AOL and Compuserve became popular. That was around 95/96. We, academics, suddenly became the minority and we hated it. AOLer became a common insult. Those were the days!

Re:Interesting historical note... (1)

papa248 (85646) | more than 13 years ago | (#217252)

I think Win95 made a BIG difference... although for me, I had a copy of Trumpet Winsock around for a long time before I had Windows 95!

My first home page (1)

BobGregg (89162) | more than 13 years ago | (#217254)

I first "saw" the Web at a technical conference held by the Software Engineering Institute in Pittsburgh in August 1994, right as I was starting as a graduate student at CMU. The first time I saw Mosaic, it was like, "wow, that's it - that's the interface we've been waiting for, it's going to change everything." I think there were something like 10000 sites on the entire Web at that point; not much more. Our class (of 10) had a "home page" contest, which I actually won, for little more reason than that I had multiple pages linked together, and had more topical links than anyone else. :-) What was it then, HTML 2.0? No Javascript, no DHTML, just straight-text early-day HTML and a little CGI on the side.

Why is it that about half the time, I feel like we had more content then than we do now?

Oh well, just another old geezer reminiscing about the good old days, I guess. Of course, back then, Usenet still had a S/N ratio > 0, too...

Re:Interesting historical note... (3)

frankie (91710) | more than 13 years ago | (#217255)

public at large had not truly begun to adopt the technology until perhaps 1996.

1996, you say? Interesting. The High Performance Computing Act [ed.gov] of 1991 paid for increasing network backbone infrastructure over the next 5 years. Perhaps there's a connection? However, I seem to remember some guy [salon.com] getting a whole lot of shit for taking credit.

TCP/IP [ais.org] . HTTP. graphical web browsers [uiuc.edu] . What do these things have in common? Answer: they were all created with government funding.

Re:Let's hope it carries on getting better (2)

radish (98371) | more than 13 years ago | (#217256)


Oh of course...junk mail never existed before the net. And child pr0n? invented in 1991 as well. Don't be such a sucker for the popular media - the net is a mechanism, nothing more nothing less. It lets people share things, what they choose to share tells you about the people, not the mechanism.

Imagine the presentation (3)

Dr_Cheeks (110261) | more than 13 years ago | (#217257)

Tim Berners-Lee (or whoever): In 10 years time trolls will be surfing Slashdot putting sporks in first posts while browsing goatsex in another window.

CERN Committee: Eh? OK Tim, um, sounds great...

Hopeless mess (1)

MonkeyMagic (118319) | more than 13 years ago | (#217258)

Trying to find something on the internet is like searching for the page you need in a library hit by a hurricane...


...with the lights turned out.

Re:Where were you when... (1)

librarygeek (126538) | more than 13 years ago | (#217259)

I had just accepted my current job. My second day here, the head librarian asked me to set up a machine with modem. Then we sat down and started "playing" with mosaic, gopher and archie. Six years later all machines on campus have highspeed access via the campus network.

So it only take 10 years to... (1)

Mekanix (127309) | more than 13 years ago | (#217260)

go from freedom, openness to opression, regulation, totalitarianism?

Bjarne

Re:A backbone more than ten ago (1)

frknfrk (127417) | more than 13 years ago | (#217261)

this story is about the www, not the internet... of course you are right, though. the internet was indeed around before the www... not sure what your post has to do with this discussion other than to help proliferate the idea that www==internet. i apologize if i seem harsh this morning... no coffee in the office :(

Re:Interesting historical note... (1)

stilwebm (129567) | more than 13 years ago | (#217262)

You're just mad because your wife read that article too and started looking over your shoulder when you were on the computer.

Re:and yet dot coms fail (5)

Nonac (132029) | more than 13 years ago | (#217263)

The web was not designed as a business platform.

The web is an astounding success. It was designed to facilitate communication, and it has done that. Don't let the fact that a few mba types are upset that they can't make money off of it detract from its success.

When a company goes broke because its business plan is based on the notion that people will buy products because they are sold on the web, that is not a failing of the web; it is a failing of the business.

10th birthday nostalgia. Spiked (5)

TomV (138637) | more than 13 years ago | (#217264)

$ telnet info.cern.ch

SunOS 5.6

login: www
Password:
Login incorrect

OK, try a modern browser pointed at the same address...
Sorry, the hypertext and WWW information is no longer available on the info.cern.ch site. The physical machine no longer exists. Please refer to one of the new sites described below
Inevitable, obvious, but still a little bit sad. Can anyone remember how many logins there were for www at info.cern.ch (i seem to recall it was about 20)?

I've still got a printout somewhere, about 10 pages of 6-point print but it was, at the time (late 1993) "the complete list of world-wide-web servers".

All .edu, .gov, .mil, .net or countrycodes (mainly .ac.*). Still no such thing as .com.

Just unthinkable only 8 years later.

Progress, eh?

TomV

Re:regarding pr0n (1)

tcc (140386) | more than 13 years ago | (#217266)

You just don't have the right sites, ask Taco, I'm sure he's got a list to share :)

Re:regarding pr0n (1)

nice (144965) | more than 13 years ago | (#217267)

umm...if i remember correctly, porn was a LOT easier to grab when the net was only 6-7 years old....before the Cyber Decency Act kicked in...

That may be true for those who only casually delve into the dank depths of the pornographic underworld, but since then pr0n has been corraled into more specific locations; salacious IRC channels, usenet (though that's really a pain), and all about independent ftp servers.

Not only is it more abundant, and more concentrated, but it is also of higher quality. 4 years is a long time for improvements in digital photography and scanning equipment.

Re:to celebrate (1)

Lizard_King (149713) | more than 13 years ago | (#217268)

let's have a 10 popup window salute!

go to your favorite pr0n site... then press the "Back" button

Re:Your elitism is showing (2)

gilroy (155262) | more than 13 years ago | (#217269)

Blockquoth the poster:
Without them there would have been an ever-increasing knowledge gap between the elite "haves" and the masses of "have-nots".
Um, we still have that knowledge gap. The vast majority of people who use AOL work on faith and believe in magic... they don't know much about what's going on inside their machines.

If you don't like this system, move to Cuba.
Ah, yes, that's the productive way to run a system: Force out anyone who spots a flaw, so that the system never need improve.

Re:Today's question... (1)

cr@ckwhore (165454) | more than 13 years ago | (#217271)

I was hanging out in gopherspace, listening to my friends brag about hypertext and I was jealous because my PC wasn't capable of 'graphics'. Hmmm... amazingly, I still use pine for email.

to celebrate (5)

enrico_suave (179651) | more than 13 years ago | (#217272)

let's have a 10 popup window salute!

E.

Re:using it for good, or just using it (2)

boaworm (180781) | more than 13 years ago | (#217273)

Well, if you define "Proper" as making big bucks on the internet, fine. Otherwise i'd guess more then 1% is using it for something "proper".

Email is a great thing, as is the "www". Easy access to information in a fast and simple way. Thats proper to me :) Communication, with friends and others, booking tickets, buying stuff online, searching, newsgroups... Thats pretty proper i'd say... And more then 1 % online are using those services :)

Re:Interesting historical note... (1)

mrleemrlee (192314) | more than 13 years ago | (#217275)

I worked at a daily newspaper from 1994 on, and it wasn't until maybe 1996-97 that we were able to refer to the Internet without defining the term.

Re:using it for good, or just using it (1)

scott1853 (194884) | more than 13 years ago | (#217277)

I hate this argument. Let make sure every third world country has all the advantages we have.

Here's an idea, maybe the people that setup homes in barren wastelands and then decide to have a couple dozen kids should not be saved. It's cruel, but be realistic.

Re:using it for good, or just using it (1)

scott1853 (194884) | more than 13 years ago | (#217278)

It's not like it's a car accident. They chose to have children despite their situation and their lack of motivation to correct it.

Re:Interesting historical note... (1)

mark_lybarger (199098) | more than 13 years ago | (#217280)

i wonder when the mass media will be able to refer to linux with out having to define it -- "an OS developed by linus and a loose knit band of hackers across the internet". i prefer it when they say "an alternative to MS windows operating system", but still..

Where we'll be at 20..... (1)

bitva (206067) | more than 13 years ago | (#217281)

Considering the way things have been going lately with peoples rights online, in 20 years we may be having /. articles presented to us in conference rooms.

The WWW is the cause of all our woes (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 13 years ago | (#217283)

Before the web came along, the internet was the home of intelligent discussion, and academic research. It was a wonderful means of communication.

Suddenly the WWW appeared. This ended this golden era. Everyone wanted the internet. The media got a hold on the idea and it has never been possible to explain to them the difference between the web and the internet since. No more research is interesting to anyone unless its web based. This network has been reduced to another tool for the corporations to force their content onto us.

The last hope for a free populace was eliminated, because the sheeple just wanted another form of passive entertainment

Re:Moore's Law of Porn (1)

FatOldGoth (207461) | more than 13 years ago | (#217284)

That way, after another 10 years, the web will be choking under the weight of 6.871947e+11 porn sites...

Yeah, but you'll only have to visit the one site. The rest will open up automatically in separate pop-up windows.


--

Where was Al Gore? (1)

T1girl (213375) | more than 13 years ago | (#217285)

What is this, a vast right-wing conspiracy? Without Al Gore [spree.com] , we'd still be sending faxes.

Moore's Law of Porn (5)

tenzig_112 (213387) | more than 13 years ago | (#217286)

As soon as the CERN machines began running rudamentary http daemons, porns sites began popping up. But every eighteen months their number doubled.

Er, wait. Make that every six months their number doubled. That way we end up with more than 2 million from an original 10 [estimates].

That way, after another 10 years, the web will be choking under the weight of 6.871947e+11 porn sites, many times more than the projected population of the Earth.

[Something to think about.]

Today's question... (1)

wardomon (213812) | more than 13 years ago | (#217287)

Were where you when the Web was invented? I'll feel really old if most of you say "grade school." I was 38.

Mosaic and the IMG tag (1)

brlewis (214632) | more than 13 years ago | (#217288)

Mosaic was what made the WWW into something one would want to bring to the masses. Specifically, when NCSA hacked up this IMG tag mess, much less thought-out than, say, the FIG (or was it FIGURE?) tag that the w3c eventually designed but couldn't get industry to accept. The IMG tag made the WWW into whiz-bang technology that got people excited.

MIT had a system called TechInfo that made it much easier to provide information to the net than the WWW did, but its acceptance was limited by the non-sexiness of plain text. With the WWW, people were willing to do extra work because the result looked so cool in Mosaic.

When did Gore ever claim to have "invented" it? (1)

brlewis (214632) | more than 13 years ago | (#217289)

He pushed legislation which opened up the NSFNET to businesses, etc. AFAIK, he never claimed to have invented the technology when speaking about his involvement. [upenn.edu] In a sense, the legislation did create the network we now know as the Internet.

Re:Light the candles! (2)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 13 years ago | (#217290)

Ack! Did anyone remember to send Al Gore a card!?!?!?

--
All your .sig are belong to us!

Mosaic @ UIUC (1)

lemonk (220326) | more than 13 years ago | (#217291)

Back in 1993 I remember a friend of mine who was working part time at NCSA told me about this cool new application called Mosaic. We went to one of the labs late at night to check out this new thing being called the WorldWideWeb. I'll never forget that.

Mosaic @ UIUC (1)

lemonk (220326) | more than 13 years ago | (#217292)

I'll never forget the time a friend of mine who was working at NCSA part time showed me Mosaic for the first time late at night in one of our labs in 1993. Eventhough there were only a handful of research sites it was still fun to think of the possibilities.

10 years old huh (1)

Foggy Tristan (220356) | more than 13 years ago | (#217293)

Which would explain why the web acts like a 5th grader

Jeez, Rob! (2)

3G (220614) | more than 13 years ago | (#217294)

Taco needs to get laid! This is his second [slashdot.org] reference to pr0n on /. in nine hours!

(Don't get me wrong, I can sympathize)

regarding pr0n (3)

unformed (225214) | more than 13 years ago | (#217295)

Talk about fast moving: 10 years old, and just look at all the pr0n you can snarf. Imagine where we'll be at 20!

umm...if i remember correctly, porn was a LOT easier to grab when the net was only 6-7 years old....before the Cyber Decency Act kicked in...

Didn't/Don't need graphics...... (1)

decaying (227107) | more than 13 years ago | (#217296)

I only had shell access (they banned slirp at uni).... so it was good old lynx for me....

Where were you when... (1)

zoomba (227393) | more than 13 years ago | (#217297)

Remeber where you were when you first used the Web? I was at my father's office at the local University right after he had just been hooked up to the 'net. God bless NCSA Mosiac, Veronica, Archie, Gopher and all the rest! The days when the net was good!

Re:Interesting historical note... (1)

SCHecklerX (229973) | more than 13 years ago | (#217299)

I started using it in 1994. Before that, it was always gopher and my private list of good FTP servers.

I think it started getting popular in 1995...right before that fscking TIME article on cyberporn that I pretty much blame for the downfall of the WWW as we once knew it.

Interesting historical note... (1)

hillct (230132) | more than 13 years ago | (#217300)

Although it may have been concieved of and deployed in academia in 1991, the public at large had not truly begun to adopt the technology until perhaps 1996. Since then, the technolohy has leap-frogged along in it's development but what would you say was the defining moment that facilitated public consumption of the technology? Was it a particular IPO, a particular announcement by a specific company? Any suggestions?

--CTH

--

Re:Interesting historical note... (2)

hillct (230132) | more than 13 years ago | (#217301)

OK, so it could be argues that it was the advent of the graphical web browser, but that doesn't seem to fit with the usage spikes in the timeline. The NCSA Mosaic browser was around for years before the public got wind of the web. Was it the netscape IPO, I don't think so. Perhaps it was the inclusion of a TCP stack in Windows 95 (as much as it pains me to give Microsoft credit...)


--

Re:Your elitism is showing (2)

virg_mattes (230616) | more than 13 years ago | (#217302)

> Um, we still have that knowledge gap. The vast majority
> of people who use AOL work on faith and believe in magic...
> they don't know much about what's going on inside their machines.


You're right, of course, but the point is that they're using those machines, where ten years ago nobody without a large degree of acumen even went near them. As much as I despise AOL, it does provide the "have-nots" with impetus for getting to know the basics so they can get online.

> Ah, yes, that's the productive way to run a system:
> Force out anyone who spots a flaw, so that the system never need improve.


Not exactly. The system did "improve" (I quote the term since I don't know if going to a paid-by-advertising model is an improvement, but at least it's economically viable) and now this user is lamenting the change. His comment is, "if you don't like how the system has changed to stay operable, leave it." The flaw in this case is the person who says advertising sucks without providing a realistic alternative.

One last note: "Blockquoth" is a great term. I plan to use it on occasion.

Virg

The WWW is the cause of all our...Whoa! (3)

virg_mattes (230616) | more than 13 years ago | (#217306)

> Before the web came along, the internet was the home
> of intelligent discussion, and academic research. It
> was a wonderful means of communication.


Two things: first, the intelligent folk still gather on the Internet, and second, it's still a wonderful means of communication. I'm a member of a Moot that's entirely email-based, and I therefore have opportunities to discuss topics I'd never otherwise know with very smart people I'd never otherwise meet. I can converse for free with my friends who live hundreds of miles from me, and my father and I often share online games.

> Suddenly the WWW appeared. This ended this golden era.

"Golden era"?!? I think I'd have to argue with you there. I ran a BBS for many years, and I thoroughly enjoyed the sense of community that it engendered, but I don't look back on my BBS days with longing to return to the "golden age". Perhaps you're glossing over the fact that there was so much less available on the pre-1991 Internet, or perhaps you have no need for, and therefore no appreciation of, what out there now.

> Everyone wanted the internet. The media got a hold on the idea
> and it has never been possible to explain to them the difference
> between the web and the internet since. No more research is interesting
> to anyone unless its web based. This network has been reduced to
> another tool for the corporations to force their content onto us.


It's okay that everyone wants the Internet, it's not their fault that the mainstream media confuses WWW and the Internet, and since non-WWW research is (I'm guessing) interesting to you, and it's certainly of interest to me, you can't very well make statements that nobody cares about anything but the Web. And also, you're assuming a lot to say the the only use of the WWW is as a corporate propaganda tool. There's a lot out there that isn't corporate, and saying that the influx of advertising and other content by business has spoiled the Web is very much like saying that roads serve no use other than as a repository for billboards.

> The last hope for a free populace was eliminated, because
> the sheeple just wanted another form of passive entertainment.


Ah, here's the rub. "How dare those sheeple demand that the Internet give them anything other than what I deem appropriate" is your message. How very elitist of you. How odd that your statement so closely reflects the lamentation of the Women's Temperance League about how bawdy stories and romance novels had ruined libraries as a repository of higher knowledge and drawn the unwashed masses into their doors. You are right to assume that some people want the Web to be just another form of passive entertainment. You are wrong, however, to assume that all users that use and enjoy the Web are sheeple that don't know any better than to be led around by their credit cards.

I've been working with (and on) the Internet since my school days almost twenty years ago, and I don't seem to recall any "golden age" back then. It was usually a big pain in the ass, mostly because of "more learned than you" types like yourself. Get over it, and try the Web for real. You might enjoy what you find.

Virg

That's funny.. (1)

OblongPlatypus (233746) | more than 13 years ago | (#217307)

May 17 is my country's independence day. You're asking me why I'm not out celebrating? Well maybe I will next year, knowing I now have one more reason to do so :)

Re:Interesting historical note... (1)

westfieldscientific (240349) | more than 13 years ago | (#217309)

If there was a single defining moment, I think it would have to be when ISPs began marketing unlimited flat-rate dialup access....and everybody immediately wanted it.

Constant connection, a novelty at first, has an odd, subtle fascination. It changes everything, and I don't think there's any way now for the world to turn back.

It's also worth noting in comparison to more recent airhead stupidity that these providers operate profitably by offering a service that customers actually want, and have no objection to paying a modest proportional fee for in return.

Got it back-to-front (1)

evil_roy (241455) | more than 13 years ago | (#217310)

This is a great example of how far we haven't come at all. 10 years to develop and exploit and what have we got .... thousands of more users looking at the same crap on thousands more sites - not better or different - just more. Check out those screenshots of the first browser-editor-wp extension. We've hardly moved at all.

Re:Today's question... (1)

annielaurie (257735) | more than 13 years ago | (#217311)

OK. Then this will make you feel better: I was running around Washington, DC building and installing NetWare servers. I was 41...

Annie

Light the candles! (2)

Seeka (258435) | more than 13 years ago | (#217312)

We should all light a candle and take a picture from outerspace to represent the current structure of the WWW. This is cool news.

Seeka

We've come a long way (1)

Fat Casper (260409) | more than 13 years ago | (#217313)

Since I first downloaded Mosaic. Back in the day when the most useful thing on the net was online library card catalogs. Every few months I'll do something with the web that'll just stop me in my tracks with wonder. When I was a kid, we had 2 sets of encyclopedias and lots of other references. Reports were a snap.

Now everybody has more than that. I don't know anyone with an encyclopedia anymore, and I can't remember the last time I saw an atlas. Information is so available that we don't think about it, and with google, you don't even need any research skills. Things just get better.

Re:The WWW is the cause of all our woes (1)

Fat Casper (260409) | more than 13 years ago | (#217314)

And on the sixth day, He made Slashdot. And it was good. And on the seventh day, He is widely reported to have rested; in reality he was trying to bring the net back up, for He had not expected the Slashdot effect.

Don't Act Your Age (1)

Greenisus (262784) | more than 13 years ago | (#217315)

Maybe in 20 years the www will seem more mature, since it appears to be run by a bunch of 10 year olds now.

Hah! (1)

smart.id (264791) | more than 13 years ago | (#217318)

This is pretty cool. Think about it, there were like 20 WEB SITES when this first debuted. Now there's amiallyourbaseornot.com. Now that's just weird.

Re:Interesting historical note... (1)

Sven Tuerpe (265795) | more than 13 years ago | (#217319)

(...) but what would you say was the defining moment that facilitated public consumption of the technology? Was it a particular IPO, a particular announcement by a specific company?

Perhaps the first feminist campaign against digital pr0n? There actually has been one in Germany, back when the Internet still had been used mainly by academics.

Seriously, I believe it started when major newspapers began writing about it. You cannot tie it to a specific date. Since newspapers tend to copy from each other, only a small number of original articles was needed to spread the information that there is a thing called Internet. The technology had been available for years before, as well as access to online services, e.g. through Compuserve or local BBSs. Personally, I found the Internet attached to the back side of my first Unix account at the university back in '92.

Oh, and there was all that Information Superhighway [doc.gov] babble from politicians. They still don't understand the Net, but they are doing a pretty good job telling everyone how to become a Super Couch Potato online.

Memories... nothing more than... uh... something? (1)

doppleganger871 (303020) | more than 13 years ago | (#217322)

I remember way back when... A 2400bps modem on my Commodore 128. I wasn't even using the internet, I was still using FidoNet. I first got a look at the web on my dad's laptop work computer, and was excited to find so much info on Commodore computers, it was great. Windows 3.11, Netscape 3.x. Ahhh... Not that I can't find the info now, but it seemed more innocent back then, it was all new. No banner ads, no popup windows, just information. Ohwell.

Your elitism is showing (2)

sharkticon (312992) | more than 13 years ago | (#217324)

How is the fact that they enabled the Webification of thousands of pinks and high school girls who just want to chat and meet guys--how is that a GOOD thing?

So what, should only the priviliged few be allowed to be online? How is that a good thing? We live in a modern democracy in which everyone is supposed to be able to have the same opportunities, and services like AOL provided that. Without them there would have been an ever-increasing knowledge gap between the elite "haves" and the masses of "have-nots".

All it does is justify the existance of things like doubleclick and other garbage-producing companies.

What the hell is wrong with advertising? Without it you wouldn't be reading this site and posting such nonsense, because it wouldn't exist. If you don't like this system, move to Cuba.

Let's hope it carries on getting better (4)

sharkticon (312992) | more than 13 years ago | (#217325)

At this landmark occasion in the web's history we can look back and see just how much things have changed, and for the better, in the last ten years.

To start with, the web was an academic project to allow scientists to communicate more easily without the limitations of email. Since then it has grown massively, shedding the ivory tower textual paradigm to become the most popular part of the net by far, and the driving force behind the massive growth in the amount of people who have net access, a thing which we all agree is good.

Nowadays the web is a reflection of modern life rather than a bastion for the priviliged few. Anyone can grab an AOL CD and get online, put their web page up and chat to people across the world, and without services like AOL we would still be stuck in the situation we had in 93, where there was a marked lack of content and none of the features we take for granted nowadays. Heck, even the IMG tag wasn't in the initial design, which says something about what they intended the web for!

I'm hoping that the continuing growth in ordinary, real people coming online will further fuel the technological advances that have made the web such an interesting place today, and that cheaper and faster access will mean another explosion in useful content for us all.

And again (5)

sharkticon (312992) | more than 13 years ago | (#217326)

Um, we still have that knowledge gap. The vast majority of people who use AOL work on faith and believe in magic... they don't know much about what's going on inside their machines.

More elitism. Why should everyone have to know how their computers work? The fact that people encounter difficulties through not having such knowledge is a flaw in computer systems, not the people using them. Technology after all, should be our tool rather than our master, which is why Windows is still far better on the desktop than Linux.

Well, do try Internet Consultant ! (1)

da5idnetlimit.com (410908) | more than 13 years ago | (#217329)

It's one of the main branches doing money : explain to people how to invest into net. Most of them must have been 2nd hand car dealer, or such, before...

in 20 years? (1)

beelzebubu (412827) | more than 13 years ago | (#217330)

Imagine where we'll be at 20!

In 20 years, I wonder if the web will still exist at all. Maybe we'll have found something much better, like a world of virtual reality contacts, where we don't need internet anymore.

Imagine, online porn will be much nicer then ;-)

Re:.NET will replace WWW (1)

beelzebubu (412827) | more than 13 years ago | (#217331)

One of the reasons why .NET is doomed to fail hopelessly is that it is windows-only. The other is that .NET costs money.

The success of internet is it's possibility to run on any platform that supports an open standardized networking implementation and all this being free.

.NET will be windows-centered. Especially with macOS X and the coming gnome-2.0 (with a fast , stable mozilla and nautilus), nobody will ever pay for something like .NET. People will use linux rather than paying $1000 for windows. And would you pay $1 per hour for using word (.NET strategy)? Or rather use AbiWord? I know you'll use AbiWord (or StarOffice, KWord, whatever) if it comes to choosing and that is *exactly* why .NET will fail.

Nice question for the slashdot poll: is more than 50% of your software legal and what OS do you use? Hypothesis: 50% no/windows, other 50% yes/linux.

In 20 years... (1)

zero1101 (444838) | more than 13 years ago | (#217332)

Imagine where we'll be at 20!

There will be TWICE as much pr0n? Sweet!

Re:using it for good, or just using it (1)

dinivin (444905) | more than 13 years ago | (#217333)


So, if you're ever in a position where you could die unless someone intervenes to save you, we should all just turn away because you were too stupid to avoid taht situation?

Dinivin

Re:using it for good, or just using it (3)

dinivin (444905) | more than 13 years ago | (#217334)

10 years, and only 1% of all users have found out how to do something proper with it.

What do you define as proper?

Frankly, I'd be more disturbed by the fact that indoor plumbing as been around for hundreds (thousands, really) of years, but millions of people (if not billions of people) still don't have that simple "luxury." Or that we've been able to control the flow of electricty for centuries, but billions of people still don't seen to have that simple luxury, either. Maybe we should worry about getting people up to the basics before we start worrying about the fact that so few people have found a proper use of the world wide web.

Dinivin

Hippity Happity B-Day (1)

RalphTWaP (447267) | more than 13 years ago | (#217336)

*blinks*

Wow.... it's older than I am... or at least more mature.
Nietzsche on Diku:
sn; at god ba g
:Backstab >KILLS< god.

Re:Moore's Law of Porn (1)

pagsz (450343) | more than 13 years ago | (#217337)

That way, after another 10 years, the web will be choking under the weight of 6.871947e+11 porn sites, many times more than the projected population of the Earth

Assuming a population of 6.5 billion, that's approximately 100 porn sites per person. Talk about options.
Of course, not everyone will have internet access. Assuming 75% of the population has access, that's about 140 per user.

So what does this tell you? Microsoft is taking the wrong approach to world domination. They should have started with porn.

Starting a company called MicroPorn,

Re:AOL? (1)

blang (450736) | more than 13 years ago | (#217338)

AOL it is.

I remember back in early 90's when the growing number of AOLers started to flood USENET. Suddenly hoards of hyperactive monkeys were posting lame comments. Most of them were just shouting in to the woods to see if there was an echo.

An international community that had over many years fine-tuned the etiquette of USENET was outraged by these barbarian hordes.

Eventually the retards at AOL figured out how to make a web gateway from their proprietary network to the internet, and most of the monkeys disappeared, but USENET never recovered to it's old glory. The monkeys were gone, but instead the thigh cream industry, the pyramid schemes, and web porn sites was making up the bulk of the USENET postings.

And it is also the national day of Norway. (2)

blang (450736) | more than 13 years ago | (#217339)

Norway is so far ahead in technology, that we chose to make the birth of the web our national day...

still waiting for ipv6 (1)

rassie (452841) | more than 13 years ago | (#217341)

Imagine where we'll be at 20!
Still waiting for ipv6 to bring more IP adresses :-)

using it for good, or just using it (4)

rassie (452841) | more than 13 years ago | (#217342)

10 years, and only 1% of all users have found out how to do something proper with it.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>