Do you miss the internet of the 90s and the 2000s?
>>125
you sound autistic, and I as a racist sexist pedophile am here to bully you
(￣へ￣) Hello. I am "Mr. Likes To Sage Threads". I do believe this is a thread in need of Sage, so I would like to sage it. That is why my name is "Mr. Likes To Sage Threads".
You don't belong here GTFO kid you're too young to remember the old internet also fuck off with the tripfagging nobody likes trip/namefags on any message board.
>>141
Nope you don't belong here anymore your time has passed. Be at peace. LOL.
i got internet for the first time yesterday, still getting new to this whole message board thing. Im literally 14 btw, whats up dudes!!
Someone reminded me the other day of how malicious popups used to be, and I don't miss that. Remember when popup blockers first became a thing?
Of course, the fucktards that make web coding added those newfangled popup things that you can't block these days, because they're dribbling shits, but at least the new ones don't spawn new windows in an infinite loop.
The internet in the 80s.
launching internet missiles at ur position while listening to the c&c soundtrac
people seem way more cynical humorless and sometimes malicious these days
>>157
Or were they always that way & you just noticed it?
http://living$tingy.blog$pot.com/2008/12/unwritten-social-contract.html?m=1
This is very true i think smartphones and social media are partly to blame for that as well as todays political culture as well. Back in 2005 the average normie was a lot more polite on the internet and it was a lot easier to make friends unlike today.
^the internet went to shit when you started using it
I beg to differ i started using it in the late 90s.
why chill so hard here
it s like you re hiding stuff
man
this is all too gay
holy shit
Check out myspace & tumblr. Yeah.
>>166
Our Digital Pasts Weren’t Supposed to Be Weaponized Like This
A recent firing at The Associated Press is the latest example of the way in which our digital pasts are never far from the present, despite what early internet evangelists thought.
By Kashmir Hill
May 29, 2021
The internet is a fossil machine. It preserves our thoughts, our political positions, our jokes, our photos, our triumphs and our mistakes in silicon amber, just waiting to be dug up. And that has led to a kind of modern sport: Find an outrageous piece of a person’s past that can be weaponized, put it on display for all to see and hope for the worst.
The most surprising thing, though, is that this is still happening.
The latest target of adversarial archaeologists is Emily Wilder, 22, who was fired by The Associated Press just three weeks into the job after the Stanford College Republicans surfaced her pro-Palestine activism and social media posts while in college. Though she was based in Arizona, her old posts caught the attention of national political figures from the right who amplified them, arguing that her views compromised her employer’s ability to accurately cover the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The A.P. contends that the firing was for social media conduct while Ms. Wilder worked for the media outlet, but it seemed to Ms. Wilder and her supporters that the incident was triggered by the years-old Facebook posts.
We’ve been living with social media — and its powers of preservation — for nearly two decades now, since Facebook came into existence in 2004 and gradually convinced a billion of us that it was a good idea to leave a digital trail online attached to our real names. This is a cycle so familiar that the progression from unearthed post to contrition or firing feels lockstep. It almost makes you forget that it wasn’t supposed to be this way. As more and more people documented their lives online, so that our whole selves, past and present, were visible, society was predicted to become more empathetic and forgiving. But instead the opposite has happened.
People were thinking about this a lot a decade ago. During an August 2010 interview, it was on the mind of Eric Schmidt, then the chairman of Google, the creator of the best fossil-digging equipment out there. Mr. Schmidt predicted, “apparently seriously,” according to The Wall Street Journal, that young people would change their names upon reaching adulthood in order to escape their digital pasts. The prediction was widely mocked for its impossibility.
The same month, another prominent data scientist, Jeff Jonas, offered a more utopian prediction: “I hope for a highly tolerant society in the future,” he wrote on a legal blog called Concurring Opinions. “A place where it is widely known I am four or five standard deviations off center, and despite such deviance, my personal and professional relationships carry on, unaffected.”
>>167
I remember this prediction because I cited it a decade ago when a 28-year-old woman had her Congressional campaign upended by a “scandal,” one that seems quaint by today’s standards but was a glimpse into our future. The woman who provided it was named, coincidentally, Krystal Ball.
Ms. Ball was running as a Democrat for a House seat in Virginia at the time; a conservative blog got its hands on decade-old photos from a post-college Christmas party, where Ms. Ball was dressed as a “naughty Santa” and her husband at the time was Rudolph with a red dildo for a nose. This sounds ridiculous, but the “raunchy party photos” fueled news stories across the world. I thought that what she was experiencing was notable for its limited shelf life: As more and more people got smartphones and flocked to apps like Instagram and Twitter that encouraged them to thoroughly document their lives and thoughts, this sort of shaming of people’s past selves would surely stop, because the throwing of stones would become hypocritical and dangerous.
Ms. Ball thought so too. She lost that long-ago Congressional race and is now a media commentator and the author of a book about the new political age. She said in a recent interview that she thought her so-called scandal would be a temporary blip before society adjusted and “that people would grow more accepting” of photos or problematic comments from the past.
“It’s the polar opposite,” she said. “It’s more reactionary and judgmental than it’s ever been.”
Why haven’t repeated calls to replace digital shaming with empathy and compassion resonated? Or at the very least, why hasn’t a fear of mutually assured destruction set in?
Editors’ Picks
At the French Open, Naomi Osaka Seeks Comfort on Clay and No Interviews
Her High School Said She Ranked Third in Her Class. So She Went to Court.
How the First Black Female Jockey Rode Into Oblivion
Continue reading the main story
“I think it’s because it’s worked, so partisan operatives and actors are going to continue to use the technique,” Ms. Ball said. “They ginned up this outrage to get Emily Wilder fired. And then they have the temerity to cry about ‘cancel culture.’”
That is the current phrase used by the political right to describe punishing people for “wrongthink.” According to Pew, a majority of Americans are now familiar with the term, but feelings are mixed about whether it’s beneficial, leading to a more accountable society, or a cruel form of punishment, willfully taking people’s actions out of context.
Part of the problem is how time itself has been warped by the internet. Everything moves faster than before. Accountability from an individual’s employer or affiliated institutions is expected immediately upon the unearthing of years-old content. Who you were a year ago, or five years ago, or decades ago, is flattened into who you are now. Time has collapsed and everything is in the present because it takes microseconds to pull it up online. There is little appreciation for context or personal evolution.
And it’s not just happening to journalists and politicians, whose jobs invite frequent public musings, but to high school students and business executives, because we are all now online so much of the time.
>>168
Some see the benefit in this shift. In the same Pew survey, of over 10,000 people, more than half approved of calling out people for their behavior on social media, saying it helps hold people accountable. “People look closer at their actions, forcing them to examine what they are doing, why they are doing it, and what are the consequences of said actions,” said one of the people surveyed.
Ms. Ball remains hopeful that things will change. “The reactionary culture is damaging and unhelpful and just really brutal for everybody involved,” she said. “A lot of our society wants to see ourselves as believing in forgiveness, believing in redemption, believing in the ability of people to learn and grow and get better.”
She pointed to the backlash against Ms. Wilder’s firing; dozens of staff members wrote an open letter to The A.P. expressing dismay.
“The less successful it is, the less that it works,” she said, “the less interest in it people are ultimately going to have.”
After a pause though, she added: “A lot of that comes down to how corporate H.R. departments handle themselves, which is not a great place to place your hopes.”
For Ms. Ball herself, the unearthing of her party pics, and resulting “scandal,” ultimately provided a professional boost. Cable news programs invited her on air to talk about it, and then, impressed at her performance, invited her back to comment on other political happenings, leading to her current role.
“I was very fortunate,” she said. “The only reason I ended up with a career in media was because of this attempted, like, cancellation.”
>>169
Kashmir Hill is a tech reporter based in New York. She writes about the unexpected and sometimes ominous ways technology is changing our lives, particularly when it comes to our privacy.
Internet always changes...
>>132
That made me visibly cringe, that's like reading "teh internets are WinRAR!!" but at least that's funny, the latter is just sad
insert phone modem noises
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsNaR6FRuO0
>>35
>>57
I'm a 1998 baby and lucked out in that my mom loved reading atheist forums on craigslist in like 2002 and was given a lot of autonomy for a toddler, so I had lots of early access to internet content. It ``helped'' that my shitty home situation got me a laptop in the third grade because I was moving so much. The unfortunate result of all this is a young and far too early introduction to imageboards. Now I'm here with you geriatrics, all because I started visiting this site that I viewed as a cultural continuation of /jp/ c.2010
I hate being a loser
The old internet was never that good. Stop looking at stuff through rose tinted glasses. You want to go back to the era of dial up where it took a week to download an image? Fuck that shit. What killed the old internet was that everybody began using it and using it all the god damn time. The average ugg boot wearing normie succubus spends most of her day browsing on her smartphone, browsing useless shit, texting her whore friends, or looking at truce crime videos so she knows which serial killer she wants to masturbate to next. And when ordinary society begins using the internet like a crack cocaine addict you need to dumb shit down to make it accessible and convenient, you’ve got to centralize and organize it, you’ve got to give it a slick presentation and let it feed their narcissism by allowing them to create stupid online profiles where they can showcase the mendacity of their preened and fake lives (or whatever passes as “life” these days). The result is a mass of brainwashed zombies, nothing more than organic bots that populate the entire internet spewing their hatred and whiny bitchiness.
>The old internet was never that good.
And then you proceed to explain why old internet was good and modern internet is bad?
>>170
Shame is such a utilized tool in human society. Imo the internet facilitates our worst behavior, no doubt shaming will be with us forever. A tolerant society is impossible.
>>57 Possibly the best troll in history right here.
>>75 I lurked 4chan for about 3-4 years before actually making a post in like 2012 dude. Coincidentally one of my first posts was a comment in the thread Adam Lanza posted on /b/ before he went Gamer Mode. They got me in the screenshot, too.
The only people nostalgic for those days are people who never lived through them.
>>181
The only people claiming this are people who never lived through them.
>>177
The old internet was shit, it was just less shit. back then the internet was like 60% good 40% trash while today its like 90% trash. its like a sewer, as long as there is balance between shit and water everything flows smoothly, but today there are so many normies and mindless zombies using crapping into the system we are reaching a critical mass of shit. still id rather not go back to the days of dial up internet.
>>183
Define good.
Majority of the old internet was boring, you had to find things like flash websites, photoshop image forums and especially imageboards via word of word of mouth or by getting lucky with google searches.
>>185
That's a part of what made it good. Only people who were interested would find your nichè, it keeps the "followers" away. Nowadays a hobby can be changed overnight simply by just some popular social media person on the internet getting into it and hundreds of thousands of people flocking to the hobby at the same time completely clueless of culture and permanently changing the hobby.
It was a natural form of gatekeeping that everything was hard to find.