×

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!

Geocities To Be Made Available As a 900GB Torrent

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the only-half-will-be-under-construction-gifs dept.

The Internet 215

An anonymous reader writes "Felt a shortage of the blink tag in your life lately? Well, have no fear. One year after Geocities was shut down in a cost-cutting move by Yahoo, a group self-styled as 'The Archive Team' have announced they will be releasing a ~900GB torrent file archive. It doesn't have every single site, but they believe they got most of it. The team believes that it's important to not just delete our digital culture, and as crazy as Geocities may have been, it was an important cultural milestone in the history of showing that anyone could create content online."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

215 comments

might be interesting to host it? (3, Interesting)

phyrexianshaw.ca (1265320) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066110)

I'd be interested to see who would host something like that.

if I had the bandwidth for a good price, I'd consider it.

Re:might be interesting to host it? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34066306)

Considering that I'm already seeding a certain 790 GiB torrent [nyaatorrents.org] this shouldn't be a big deal.

Re:might be interesting to host it? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34066432)

Anime sucks dude.

Re:might be interesting to host it? (1)

insufflate10mg (1711356) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066540)

I tried really hard to determine what Touhou is but couldn't figure it out. Care to elaborate?

Re:might be interesting to host it? (1)

Dutch Gun (899105) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066818)

It's a series of shooter-type games created by a lone Japanese developer. And because it's Japanese, there are apparently lots of cute Anime-style girls involved somehow. No idea beyond that.

Re:might be interesting to host it? (3, Insightful)

Superken7 (893292) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066316)

why not host it on the same distributed system you will get the content from? P2P.

I am sure there has already been developed something like this (and if not, there is probably a reason on why its a bad idea), and I suspect there are many drawbacks like high latency, low bandwidth/throughput meaning very slow page loads etc...

I'm too lazy to look it up now, but just putting this thought out:

But why not just make some websites run on the same distributed DHTs such as Vuze or other existing P2P technologies?
We'd all be sharing part of the content and everyone would be able to access the content too (eventually), resulting in (slow) low-cost, ideally SPOF-free web hosting.

Re:might be interesting to host it? (1)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066494)

Why reinvent the wheel?

FreeNet does this already. It's mainly marketed towards evading censorship by distributing content in a way that is very hard to shut down and track. However, its architecture is very well suited to doing exactly what you want, having content intelligently hosted by a large number of independent nodes. The anonymity and privacy would just be bonus in this case.

Re:might be interesting to host it? (2, Interesting)

Kjella (173770) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066690)

However, its architecture is very well suited to doing exactly what you want, having content intelligently hosted by a large number of independent nodes.

Seriously, have you tried it? If you don't need anonymity, then Freenet is extremely underperforming and extremely dumb. A much better solution for this use case would simply be to create a special torrent client that would only store say 5% of the torrent, because you have global statistics at the tracker each new peer will download the rarest parts so in total you'd have a full seed. It could be trivially adjusted to work across many torrents, so that it'd continuously choose the least populated torrents and slowly rotate that content in.

Re:might be interesting to host it? (1)

Cicada7 (1051002) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066884)

I am sure there has already been developed something like this (and if not, there is probably a reason on why its a bad idea), and I suspect there are many drawbacks like high latency, low bandwidth/throughput meaning very slow page loads etc...

Sounds just like when I actually used Geocities. The nostalgia factor alone makes me want to see this happen.

Re:might be interesting to host it? (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066998)

I object.

I was told my website would be deleted, and now I'm learning that didn't happen? There are certain things (like my resume) that I'd like to see disappeared. I wasn't expecting anyone to come along and store it for the next hundred years. Oh well.

might be interesting to buy the drives? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34066948)

The thought occurred to me that the simplest way to archive would have been to purchase the Geocities disk drives. Then there would have been a near certainty that all of it was gotten. At the very least I hope there was coordination amongst all the archivists to prevent duplication and speed up getting the content.

Well, crap (5, Funny)

rritterson (588983) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066142)

And now my early-teen horrible taste and design ability will live forever in it's terrible FrontPage '97 designed glory. Hallelujah!

Re:Well, crap (2, Interesting)

jlechem (613317) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066202)

I actually had a few geocities sites I used back in college. It would be interesting to see if they're in the list. Sadly it will take me 4 months to download this with Comcasts 250Gb monthly cap. There needs to be an index of the sites so people can search through it w/o downloading the entire thing.

Re:Well, crap (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066296)

If you think a 250GB monthly cap is bad, don't even read about the ones in Canada.

Re:Well, crap (1)

alphax45 (675119) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066428)

Rogers lowered mine from 60 GB to 25 GB however I just saw a deal in Costco with Primus and there is NO CAP. So Rogers is going to give me NO CAP or I'm gone :)

Re:Well, crap (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34066924)

And now my early-teen horrible taste and design ability will live forever in it's terrible FrontPage '97 designed glory. Hallelujah!

It's history. It needs to be be archived to somewhere. Hopefully someone does have that much space to offer.

scams from spam (1)

InsaneProcessor (869563) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066150)

The only thing I have ever seen on Geocities is scam advertising from links in spam.

Re:scams from spam (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34066872)

From the sounds of things you were late to the game. I recall Geocities in 1998/99 being a somewhat decent place to surf around in.

I see TFA thinks to ask the same question I did (5, Insightful)

idontgno (624372) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066184)

Of course, someone could make the argument that this archive is copyright infringement. I doubt anyone will, but it is an interesting question. The archiving is an important point in preserving digital history, and yet it's also a moment of massive copyright infringement -- technically speaking. This is the sort of bizarrely bad result you get in a world where copyright is automatically given to any content at the moment of creation. Most of the people creating Geocities pages would have no reason (or desire) to copyright what they created, and yet they all got it by default.

In this insanely litigious society, I wonder what kind of copyright release (from all the grillions of Geocities content copyright holders) these "Archive" chaps got? I hope it doesn't come back to bite them.

On an unrelated note, anyone wanna bet how many megabytes of this 1TB torrent is <blink> tags and "under construction" GIFs?

Re:I see TFA thinks to ask the same question I did (2, Insightful)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066286)

I don't think you can be sued for copying a web page to a file... If so, browsers better take out that page view source functionality because it makes it all too easy.

If you were to perhaps actually host a website, with some of the infringing material, then I think you might have grounds. But an archive of it all? I doubt it.

Re:I see TFA thinks to ask the same question I did (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066352)

They wouldnt sue you for downloading it, but distributing it.

Re:I see TFA thinks to ask the same question I did (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066436)

That depends though - right? I mean Tenenbaum was sued for the downloading AND sharing, wasn't he?

I mean they were essentially distributing their website for free online anyways, and its long been shut down, so its not like they are losing any money, so no damages can be set. At what point do you have a case to bring in front of a judge? It's copyrighted and being distributed therefor I need moneys? Like I said before - I could see someone using their copyrighted designs and that might cause damages to any new sites they might have launched after Geocities came down.

Re:I see TFA thinks to ask the same question I did (1)

Lloyd_Bryant (73136) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066684)

I mean they were essentially distributing their website for free online anyways, and its long been shut down, so its not like they are losing any money, so no damages can be set. At what point do you have a case to bring in front of a judge? It's copyrighted and being distributed therefor I need moneys? Like I said before - I could see someone using their copyrighted designs and that might cause damages to any new sites they might have launched after Geocities came down.

Under the current copyright laws, no damages have to be proven - the law allows the rights holder to sue for statutory damages [wikipedia.org], without a single bit of actual evidence that they were actually harmed in any way by the infringement. This is how the RIAA companies are able to sue people like Jammie Thomas and get damages of $80k per work infringed.

(Note that in the Capitol v. Thomas [wikipedia.org] case it's pretty unlikely that they'll ever get any actual money from her, and even if the outrageous award was actually paid probably wouldn't cover their legal costs. They're just trying to make an example of her. But I could see a copyright troll like the US Copyright Group [zeropaid.com] sending out tons of threat-o-grams, in the hopes of collecting $500-$1000 from those who are afraid that putting up a fight will bankrupt them).

Re:I see TFA thinks to ask the same question I did (4, Funny)

cyan (370) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066478)

To answer your question: http://www.textfiles.com/underconstruction/ [textfiles.com]

Re:I see TFA thinks to ask the same question I did (1)

puto (533470) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066702)

What is really funny, textfiles has two textfiles I wrote in 1985 when I was 15. One about making explosives from house hould items. And the other about a homicidal, gay geometry serial killer who killed his victims and left geometric proofs on their bodies. Some things should be left buried.

Re:I see TFA thinks to ask the same question I did (1)

Hotawa Hawk-eye (976755) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066838)

Agreed. I'd love to see them offer a copy of this to the United States Library of Congress, whose mission is "... to make its resources available and useful to the Congress and the American people and to sustain and preserve a universal collection of knowledge and creativity for future generations." [loc.gov] As the US Copyright Office is part of the Library, they should know the right way to handle this distribution (or they should realize that there's no right way and that they should create one.)

And yes, I know that Geocities hosted pages from people all around the world, but the majority are probably from the US and so in some sense "under the US LoC's jurisdiction." At the very least it's a good place to start. Then maybe the LoC can work with other national libraries.

Worth the effort? (1)

sosaited (1925622) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066186)

Awesome. But do I really need to download all 900GB of it just to see if my 4KB page is in there? I think not.

Re:Worth the effort? (1)

Saishuuheiki (1657565) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066250)

Most people that have used torrents know you can specify certain files to download first

Re:Worth the effort? (1)

vux984 (928602) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066298)

Unless they "helpfully" stuck the whole thing into a rar or zip first. :(

PS is there a way to get the 'submit' button back? -- I just have 'preview, quote parent, options, cancel' now when I try to reply. I DO NOT WANT to preview every bloody time I post. :(

Re:Worth the effort? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34066348)

No. Too many people whined about not being able to edit their shit, now they gotta preview.

Re:Worth the effort? (1)

coolsnowmen (695297) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066512)

As there will be a lot of text/html, compression will actually help, as opposed to when people make zip's of movies.

Re:Worth the effort? (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066312)

Maybe, but some morons keep putting a single RAR or ZIP file inside their torrent...

Re:Worth the effort? (1)

sosaited (1925622) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066396)

But it still won't be useful as I am pretty sure the one I want was named "index.htm". Unless they renamed all of them with "Geocities-username-directory-file.html"

Re:Worth the effort? (1)

RaymondKurzweil (1506023) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066308)

If they don't do something retarded, like make the torrent a single zip file (and even that is not the end of the world), since it is a torrent, you could selectively download portions. It all depends on how they catalog the files in the torrent. HTML file level granularity would definitely not be feasible (or smart), but there are other methods that would be a good compromise.

So no, if the people are not complete retards, then you wouldn't have to download the whole thing.

Considering that these people are putting effort into preserving geocities, I don't know about the retard bit though. We'll see.

I wonder what Jason Scott would think about this. Personally, textfiles is one of my favorite places. But this doesn't feel the same.

Re:Worth the effort? (1)

sosaited (1925622) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066430)

Sure its nice that they are putting this much effort to preserve Geocities, but for people trying to find and recover their own pages, it won't be helpful if they didn't put a lot of time renaming the files properly.

i'll recover my files!! (1)

Skatox (1109939) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066196)

I was one of the idiots who lost files in geocities (don't ask me why i didn't backup it), maybe i'll download those 900Gb for a few IMPORTANTS kb.

And to think. (2, Insightful)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066198)

It all can be stored on a drive that costs less then $100.
Now is that 900GB compressed or not? not compressed it would be a few hundred dollars for a RAID.

Geocities was important (3, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066206)

It basically told everyone how the internet as the web as a whole would be laid out, from a users perspective, not a technology perspective.
.

What's the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34066212)

Seriously? Is anyone going to download an almost 1TB file just to browse a GeoCities? Why not just give it to archive.org and let them take up the strain?

Neat! (2, Funny)

DWMorse (1816016) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066236)

I'm ALWAYS looking for ways to make my ISP hate me!

Or, maybe not me... how about my neighbor with the unsecured wireless?

Next-generation .torrent needed? (1)

Junior J. Junior III (192702) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066240)

If the torrent file were itself filterable in any reasonably non-labor intensive way, this would be pretty cool for scraping the 0.001% of Geocities that might be worth my while. (I'm not slamming the content authors for Geocities; everyone has a different 0.001% that is worth their while). We can already select individual files with in a torrent and avoid downloading the entire thing, but being able to select those files through keywords or regex or indexed search results rather than manually clicking a checkbox per file would be awesome.

Re:Next-generation .torrent needed? (2, Insightful)

ClintJCL (264898) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066324)

What you are asking for is a next-generation torrrent client, not a next-generation torrent.

Re:Next-generation .torrent needed? (2, Insightful)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066350)

Shouldn't the files be in folders, meaning you can already at least target a single website?

Re:Next-generation .torrent needed? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34066538)

Should be yes, but as several others have noted, it's likely this is likely archived data. If whoever created it archived specific sites, so you can download individual ones, then that's great, but if its one giant 900 GB .zip file....

I hope they make it available in parts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34066272)

So I can download a small part of it and donate upstream for this good cause.

Interesting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34066290)

Since it wont be an illegal file (I would assume), I wonder if it will be subject to bandwidth throttling? :-D Dear ISP: Now is the time to hate me.

Obligatory (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34066320)

And nothing of value was... saved?

MOD PARENT UP! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34066446)

MOD PARENT UP!

Re:Obligatory (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066524)

Speaking as somebody who had an awful site on Geocities circa mid 2000, I have to assume that most of the sites were at least as bad.

This is going to clog all the tubes! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34066326)

For the sake of the tubes don't do it!

On the contrary, the web must forget (5, Insightful)

SecurityGuy (217807) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066342)

There's been a growing counter sentiment that I think is correct. Not only is it wrong that we must preserve everything, we should probably forget most things.

Keeping a permanent copy of every bad web site made by every bored teen is not actually useful, any more than keeping every grocery list, or to do list, or every piece of homework you ever did as a child. Some things simply don't have future value. The fact that we can keep things forever at near zero cost doesn't mean that we should keep things of near zero value. Let it go.

Human societies have this nice ability to forget. If you say something really horrible to me today, I'll be mad about it for a while, then get over it. Archiving everything means keeping this sort of thing around forever. Should we really? What's the benefit? It's not accountability. I've said stupid things online, at this point almost 20 years ago, that I now recognize to be stupid things. They aren't sentiments held by me today. Reading them today will cause you to think and feel things about me, when they were written by a quite different person. This is going to be all too common in the future when people are online in their childhood, when saying stupid things that will later embarass you is quite common, if not a daily occurrence.

In short, sure, we should remember our digital culture, but we should also throw out our digital garbage.

Re:On the contrary, the web must forget (2, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066468)

...Except for the fact that A) It can be helpful and B) It will increasingly be easier.

I think everyone can think of a webpage (might not be Geocites) that has valuable information that has since closed. Plus, Geocites was a publishing service, these weren't like grocery lists but rather like little novels. Yeah, the content might be crap but it contains valuable information which shouldn't simply be deleted.

Plus, its becoming increasingly easier to store information. 10 years ago everyone would have laughed at you if you wanted to store this much information. Today, 1 TB drives are common and cheap.

Saving Geocites preserves "web 1.0" the time when anyone could make a webpage for the first time. While it might seem like trash to us, it might later provide valuable insight into cultures of the late 20th and early 21st century.

Re:On the contrary, the web must forget (1)

D Ninja (825055) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066596)

Saving Geocites preserves "web 1.0" the time when anyone could make a webpage for the first time. While it might seem like trash to us, it might later provide valuable insight into cultures of the late 20th and early 21st century.

This is the same logic that a packrat friend of mine uses when she doesn't want to throw away ANYTHING. "It is useful and valuable." Yeah? Really? If it's so useful and valuable, why the heck is it sitting in your closet/attic/basement/etc? If you haven't touched something in the past year, you don't need it. I promise you. (The only exception being something like photographs which are designed to preserve memories. The entire point of those is keeping them.)

People keep way too much junk because they are afraid of losing something, when, in reality, it's much better to close old doors so you can move forward into new (and better) areas of life.

Re:On the contrary, the web must forget (2, Insightful)

0123456 (636235) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066670)

This is the same logic that a packrat friend of mine uses when she doesn't want to throw away ANYTHING. "It is useful and valuable." Yeah? Really? If it's so useful and valuable, why the heck is it sitting in your closet/attic/basement/etc?

I'm sure some ancient Roman packrat had her friends bitching about the empty bottles and amphoras they kept in their basement, yet today archaeologists are thanking her for thereby allowing them to determine much about the diet and patterns of trade in that part of the world in that time.

Obviously the odds of some random piece of junk in your basement being useful to archaeologists in 2000 years are slim, but stashing away old digitial data is far closer to the ancient Roman packrat example.

Re:On the contrary, the web must forget (1)

tibman (623933) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066804)

If you routinely make new things or repair old things, it's a good idea to tech hoard or keep random junk because it will likely come in handy down the road.

Re:On the contrary, the web must forget (3, Interesting)

0123456 (636235) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066934)

Oh, and and for an example in the digital realm: the Apollo Guidance Computer is now flying Apollo spacecraft around the Earth and Moon in simulators, which was possible primarily because packrats kept old software listings in their basement for decades which were scanned, OCR-ed and then hand-fixed where required in order to recreate the original binaries to run in an emulator. The Saturn guidance computer which put the Apollo spacecraft into orbit is not, because there were no packrats to keep the software and IBM appears to have thrown it away or lost it.

Re:On the contrary, the web must forget (1)

DarkOx (621550) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066570)

I understand what you are saying and I agree their is some value in forgetting. Trouble is we have a wheat and chaff problem here. How do you separate what is worthy of preservation from what is best forgotten.

All those photos and posts on social media sites might seem like garbage today but some of them also might give insight to some distant future historian about some future political leader.

At the core of this as you mentioned is an economics issue. It costs us near zero to preserve and persist this information. Your challenge if you don't think keeping it all is right, than becomes find a way to sort and categorize at near zero cost so we can decide what to keep. Determining what is worth keeping must be less costly than keeping it or people will just keep all of it. I don't think that is impossible either Google has done some sorting and categorizing of Internet data that many of us would not have thought possible in say 1997.

The only alternative is to keep nothing which I doubt anyone thinks is a good idea.

Re:On the contrary, the web must forget (3, Insightful)

grumbel (592662) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066640)

There's been a growing counter sentiment that I think is correct. Not only is it wrong that we must preserve everything, we should probably forget most things.

The problem with this case and the Internet in general, isn't so much that it forgets things, but how it forgets them. Instead of the unused content disappearing, content disappears whenever its host disappears. To put that in classical terms: whenever the author of a book loses interest, it gets deleted from all the libraries in the world, doesn't sound right, but that is pretty much how the current Internet works. In this case its even more sinister, as Yahoo pulled the plug, not the original author.

Re:On the contrary, the web must forget (1)

0123456 (636235) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066698)

The problem with this case and the Internet in general, isn't so much that it forgets things, but how it forgets them. Instead of the unused content disappearing, content disappears whenever its host disappears.

True. I was recently reading through an aviation history thread which had been running for nearly ten years, and there were numerous sites which had been linked to with relevant information which simply no longer exist; in most cases the links just led to some domain squatter site.

You are right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34066694)

It is very easy to publish something on the Internet, and very hard or even actually impossible to delete it again.

Like you, I've said a lot of things about anything and everything. While nothing is actually a big deal, you can get some very detailed info on me if you were to combine all of this published material.

That was all in the distant past (at least 10 to 15 years ago) and I've wised up since. Not posting under my real name, periodic switches to new accounts on blog sites, just the standard precautions against data trawlers. Yet, I would rather have all that old stuff deleted. I have tried, and it's not going to happen. I made an effort to remove a specific picture of me, with some success. I had them all removed, or so I thought. After a few years, a few new copies surfaced. No idea how and why. And just forget about removing stuff from Usenet, even with x-no-archive it all get's stored for eternity.

And I'm in no way special or even remotely interesting to anyone. If I can't get my old shit deleted, no one can.

There really should be an expiry date to some stuff...

Re:On the contrary, the web must forget (1)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066746)

Maybe is ok to forget stupidity, but what about malice? We got already too much rewriting of history to let that happens.

Re:On the contrary, the web must forget (1)

Skim123 (3322) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066754)

Keeping a permanent copy of every bad web site made by every bored teen is not actually useful, any more than keeping every grocery list, or to do list, or every piece of homework you ever did as a child.

I agree that such extremes are not good for the individual or society today, but they would be a boon for histories.

Yes, 99.999% of those to do lists would be of zero interest, but what historian wouldn't want access to all of, say, Abraham Lincoln's to do lists and diary entries?

Re:On the contrary, the web must forget (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34066762)

You're confusing content with design, then throwing in your opinion as a self-claimed authoritative figure for future people. Culturally, the crap on Geocites will be extremely interesting to historians looking back at how things were in the web's early time, how people were feeling at the time, and not remotely interesting in any embarrassing shit you did yourself. Historians have said this over and over. You obviously have something to hide. Get over it, no one cares about you or what you've done.

Re:On the contrary, the web must forget (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066906)

You might be surprised to learn that not every Geocities page was a shitty teenage home page. Some people actually did neat and useful things, and wanted to share them with the web. Since they were busy doing neat and useful things they used the easiest web host available at the time, Geocities.

In short, sure, we should remember our digital culture, but we should also throw out our digital garbage.

How exactly do you propose we throw out one without the other? People are going to have to comb through the archives and find the stuff worth remembering. In order to do this, we need an archive like this one.

Sometimes, ugly things are worth keeping around (4, Insightful)

Burning1 (204959) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066970)

Keeping a permanent copy of every bad web site made by every bored teen is not actually useful, any more than keeping every grocery list, or to do list, or every piece of homework you ever did as a child. Some things simply don't have future value. The fact that we can keep things forever at near zero cost doesn't mean that we should keep things of near zero value. Let it go.

They may not have a huge amount of value to future historians, but I bet this data does have value to the people who originally generated much of that content.

To plot a line, you need to points of reference. For us, the present provides one point of reference, and the past another. It's much easier to see where we are going as people when we can see how far we've come. Yeah, many of those old pages are embarrassing, but much like reading my own journal entries, it really helps me appreciate how I've developed as a person.

Keeping those old web pages around also shows us about the history of social network. These days, if someone wants to throw some personal information on the web, they'll open up a facebook account. With a minimal investment of time, they'll have a fairly professional place to put their thoughts, photos, comments to friends. Back in the late 90s, little or none of that existed; geocities was the closest equivalent. Without a framework, people with no talent for web design were left to code up ugly websites with copious under construction signs. I'm sure more than a few of them went on to be professionals.

We've come a long way, baby.

Its true. its digital history. (2, Interesting)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066346)

like it or not, its digital history. moreover, most of the early game cheat sites, content sites, predecessors of a lot of now-small-scale publishing operations and even some services started at blinky pages in geocities. have some respect. its like a 1902 model car in 1928 : it may look decrepit to you now, but when more time passes, the people who will come after you will see its vintage value. you cant, because it was just 1-2 decades ago for you.

Rapidshare (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34066420)

Could you please upload it to rapidshare or mediafire for me?

Internet Archive should pick this up. (3, Interesting)

Animats (122034) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066574)

Good.

The Internet Archive should pick this up, if they haven't already. I'll talk to some people.

Archiving is getting easier. I had a minor part in preserving the archives of the Stanford AI lab. That required weeks of loading 6250bpi 2400 foot open reel tapes.

Certainly Brings Back Memories (4, Insightful)

Jason Levine (196982) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066576)

When I set up my first website (not counting a little "Hey, it's me" page I did while in college), I hosted it on GeoCities. Eventually, I outgrew them and moved to a paid hosting provider. Still, for all of the flack they get for bad design, GeoCities was to the Internet what free blog hosting sites are now: a place to put your stories, photos, etc without paying anything. If Information Wants To Be Free, then Geocities was an important part of making this happen.

Hm.. (1)

grub (11606) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066622)


I may store this on a ZFS volume. It will shrink to about half a GB with all those copies of animated flaming skulls de-duplicated.

What if I don't want my site archiving? (1)

Nick Fel (1320709) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066624)

What if I don't want them to make my shitty Geocities site available? I don't care about you and your archiving high horse. I, and every other shitty Geocities site owner, made my choice when I didn't migrate. They're intentionally going against my implicit decision.

cabrini-green (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34066630)

Geocities was the digital equivalent of Cabrini-Green.

Sweet (1)

mory (1862992) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066682)

This means the dodgey utility I wrote in high school to give my WarCraft II saved games maximum gold, wood and food will live on forever.

Forgot My Neighborhood (1)

TheNinjaroach (878876) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066834)

Aww crap. I forgot what my neighborhood was. I'll never remember my 4 digit UID. And I'll certainly never remember what content I put up.

I think it would be fun to find it, but I have no idea how to start looking.

Sent it into space (1)

arhhook (995275) | more than 3 years ago | (#34066870)

I think we should showcase our brilliant designs to aliens!

Also, interestingly enough, blinking text, marquees, and spinning logos still reflect business advertisements today, just look at your $mainstreet or Times Square.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...