I love the point the site is trying to make but I'm confused as to why this is built with a vue.js static site generator requiring node/npm/yarn and an almost 7,000 line yarn.lock file.<p>Shouldn't this literally be a single page, hand-built HTML file with inline CSS? Is this trying to be self-ironic or something?
A few months ago I created a project called Hypertext Town, a simple project where anybody can create "camps" (a collection of HTML, images etc.) and connect them together through "towns". A town lives at a subdomain (e.g: town.hypertext.town) and a camp lives at /~camp (e.g: town.hypertext.town/~camp). I never "launched" it so it's just been languishing in obscurity on the www but if anybody wants to make cute little creative HTML websites without the need for hosting, it's live to use at: <a href="https://www.hypertext.town" rel="nofollow">https://www.hypertext.town</a><p>1. click "Set up camp in www" 2. make an account 3. choose your camp name 3. add your html / images etc.<p>edit: visit <a href="https://hackernews.hypertext.town" rel="nofollow">https://hackernews.hypertext.town</a> (by TeMPOraL)
Hey!<p>I made this dumb thing! Yes, the fact that it's made with vue and stuff is on porpuse, I wanted to make it with reasonml but didn't have any time so ended up with vue.<p>The point is that we complicate so many shit today that is not needed<p>Have fun and I will add some marquee tags!
Oh man, I love stuff like this. It's too bad that the web has been taken over by bootstrap, WordPress, and squarspace. But you can do a lot with raw html, css, and JavaScript! And as a bonus, it ends up looking really unique. It's sort of weird that whenever I show friends the dumb shit I make [1], their immediate reaction is lump it in with geocities.<p>[1] ex. <a href="http://fastcashmoneyplus.biz" rel="nofollow">http://fastcashmoneyplus.biz</a>
I once read a comment here on HN about SEO, and someone was suggesting to start by buying a domain name that is your first and last name. I thought it was cool, but didn't see how it could improve SEO. But I bought it anyway[1].<p>I had nothing to put on it for a while, so I started just working on my own design skills replicating Google.com. It just a fun thing I do for absolutely no benefits to others. Great way of learning.<p>Anyway, I check my other projects analytics and it shows that a large number of user sign ups come from that random for fun project.<p>So yes, please keep building websites like these. Build your own terrible website and don't worry if they don't seem immediately useful.<p>[1]: <a href="http://www.ibrahimdiallo.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.ibrahimdiallo.com</a>
If you like this, then check out Neocities, a free and modern Geocities reboot:<p><a href="https://neocities.org/" rel="nofollow">https://neocities.org/</a><p>There are many fun sites to discover using the tag system, which emulates web rings:<p><a href="https://neocities.org/browse" rel="nofollow">https://neocities.org/browse</a>
I agree with the sentiment of this site. I have an nginx proxy set up for personal stuff, and the home page was done in an homage to GeoCities:<p><a href="https://brucewillis.sexy/" rel="nofollow">https://brucewillis.sexy/</a><p>Eventually I will get midi music playing correctly with mouse-tails.
"Salut c'est cool" is a French collective / group of friends doing this with websites, music, videos, everything. They ended up making a name in the music business, playing on huge music festivals since 2010, for the very reason of making everything quick & dirty for the fun. Lots of people want that actually.<p>Website : <a href="http://salutcestcool.com/" rel="nofollow">http://salutcestcool.com/</a><p>Check out their Christmas Calendars (2010-2014) in the "Trucs" section. Funny stuff. There you can find "Facebook 2" <a href="http://www.salutcestcool.com/quatre/facebook2/" rel="nofollow">http://www.salutcestcool.com/quatre/facebook2/</a> or "make a webpage in a few clicks" : <a href="http://www.salutcestcool.com/quatre/page/" rel="nofollow">http://www.salutcestcool.com/quatre/page/</a><p>Music : <a href="https://youtu.be/hBduDuYXJHI" rel="nofollow">https://youtu.be/hBduDuYXJHI</a>
Clicking around a little on the OP site's gallery led me to <a href="http://blog.geocities.institute/" rel="nofollow">http://blog.geocities.institute/</a><p>and, in particular, to the post on the front page as of today, "9/11 and Vernacular Web" <a href="http://blog.geocities.institute/archives/5983" rel="nofollow">http://blog.geocities.institute/archives/5983</a>, which catalogs Geocities pages updated on 9/11. Pretty haunting.
I think there is a function to "boring" website design. For the purpose of communication, it is great that we have a common dialogue, as boring as that may be.<p>People recognize buttons, textboxes, tabs, etc and knows how to use them. There are certain expectations of where certain elements would be on a site and that allows us to navigate quicker.<p>There should also be people who are pushing the boundaries of what design can look like, but I don't think that necessarily needs to be a majority.
God, I've been complaining about this for so many years now. The hardest part about duplicating the Web 1.0 aesthetic (well) has been finding the primary locations where the tile/image/iconsets originated and mirroring them for modern consumption — I'm still working on that.<p><a href="http://dataswamp.org/~john/" rel="nofollow">http://dataswamp.org/~john/</a>
People still make these exact things, only now they exist as formatting within a post on a blogging engine, rather than as standalone HTML pages. Search “aesthetic gif blog” and you’ll find tons of them.<p>As far as the “silly spamming of things between text” aspect goes—that’s still done as well, only now it’s done with emoji. (If <a href="http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/good-shit-sign-me-the-fuck-up" rel="nofollow">http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/good-shit-sign-me-the-fuck-up</a> isn’t an example of 1997-era melange-design aesthetics, I don’t know what is.)
Oh boy, it's a bit far fetched if not downright cynical (or maybe I'm oversensitive and this was not meant to be a response to people who cry about minute long cached webpack compile times or megabytes of angular payloads).<p>Frontend complexity went through the roof in the last ten years and compared to desktop software (not geocities) our developer tools and end results are not that great (ymmv).<p>But that's just my personal opinion, after fifteen years of web development and growing up along the c64 - 286 - pentium road, debugging in Watcom and fooling around in Turbo Vision.
That was not "front end", that was webpages. There was no "back end" and no business, the webpage was the whole thing. And you were not paid as a "front end engineer" or even a "designer", in fact you were not paid at all, you were just some guy making a webpage.
I've never strayed from the ideas this site is talking about (though not practicing). All my sites are static HTML/CSS written by hand designed to display content rather than look pretty. I make them for fun or to scratch an itch.<p>The only line of JS I use on my personal site is optional to trigger a page reload to display a submitted comment with the rest. The comment system itself requires no JS to use. It's just a particular string, '/@say/your comment here' appended to <i>any</i> URL on the site. A perl script tails the nginx log and generates/modifies the static html files.<p>I feel like most of this kind of design has gone away because the people that make websites make them for commerce now and that requires a lot of bullshit. Bullshit which they bring home if only because of inertia.
><i>Source code at Github</i><p>This is why it's not fun anymore. Seriously, go look at all that crap you have to learn AND understand AND debug, ETC...<p>The reason all this crap was "fun" before was because it was so damn easy. :(
Check out Digital Folklore[1] if you're into this aesthetic, it's a good collection of essays on Geocities, the early web, and related topics. One of the authors' web site[2] is also worth a look (warning: there's sound :) ). She also runs a Tumblr blog[3] that posts screenshots of real Geocities sites.<p>[1]: <a href="http://digitalfolklore.org/" rel="nofollow">http://digitalfolklore.org/</a><p>[2]: <a href="http://art.teleportacia.org/olia.html" rel="nofollow">http://art.teleportacia.org/olia.html</a><p>[3]: <a href="http://blog.geocities.institute/" rel="nofollow">http://blog.geocities.institute/</a>
Brought a smile to my face.<p>Outside of the silly nostalgia, I do appreciate the personal blog/websites that are very minimal in their theming, while still looking modern and clean.<p>The silly old geocities days were fun but, it's nice to have readable text too.
This is fantastic, let's please make more of this. I made a Dropbox-like client that helps you easily publish these kinds of sites on IPFS: <a href="https://hearth.eternum.io/" rel="nofollow">https://hearth.eternum.io/</a><p>Just make the site and drop it into your ~/Hearth/ directory, it will be published automatically.
When I see a page like that I remember Mahir's page and its popularity: <a href="http://mahir.faithweb.com/original.htm" rel="nofollow">http://mahir.faithweb.com/original.htm</a><p>It's nostalgic and definitely different from what we are used to today, but I don't really miss animated gifs, dozens of font styles and colors smashed together into a html. For me a cherry on the top was changing status message when hovering a link from target url to some custom text.
I was just browsing Tilde Club [1] and then came here. Nice to see this on the HN homepage.<p>[1] <a href="http://tilde.club/" rel="nofollow">http://tilde.club/</a>
> We used to make websites because it was fun and at a point we lost the way<p>I know this is just some little tongue in cheek joke, but I can't help but vehemently disagree with this.<p>Never did we only make websites just "because it was fun" any more or less than we do now.
Web pages used to be <i>amazingly</i> creative, with terrible usability. Now they're the <i>exact</i> opposite. Usability is good, but they all look the same.<p>I wonder what social sciences have to say about this. About public opinion swinging from one extreme to the other, never seeming to be able to land on the sane middle.
Something a lot of HNers seem to forget is that people used to build websites just for kicks. You like DragonballZ? You make a DragonballZ page on Geocities just for the hell of it. No adsense, no Google Analytics, no search-engine optimization or newsletter or investor pitch... that part of the early web seems to really have faded, and it's a pity.
I would rather opt for this then the modern JavaScript, large graphics, native code, etc., that is only there to bog down your system, and/or make your browser crash, and so forth.. (My opinion/experience.)<p>When you have en article/text that require over 10 MB to load, I can't say I'm convinced of the benefit. The only reason I visited the site in the first place were to read the article (10-15 lines of text), and/or view some minor/related photos.<p>Guess that's why Atom/RSS is on the rice again I suppose.
(DISCLAIMER: Just started using Newsboat[1] via the terminal, and I freaking love it :) )<p>Note! That is not to say that there isn't some formidable people doing astonishing works, and should be credited accordingly. The web sprawls of infinite possibles, and have something that caters to all.<p>[1] <a href="https://newsboat.org" rel="nofollow">https://newsboat.org</a>
Fortunately web is going behind the subscription model in accelerating speed. In a few years, when we can't justify subscribing to dozens of websites and paying hundreds of bucks for content we have no time to read, we're back in usenet reading single copy-pasted (pirated) articles for free.
Personal websites served two purposes:<p>1) You could write about whatever you were interested in.<p>2) You could share things you had found on the web with others.<p>These days, (1) has been superseded by YouTube and Facebook groups, and (2) has been superseded by Wikipedia/Google/YouTube.
What happened in between is that the Multi-Billion startup guys took over.<p>Now the web is the place for yet another pizza delivery startup with a super slick frontend. Websites are made industrially mainly to sell. All the big platforms took over. There is no place anymore for small self-hosted websites (or at least those are extremely rare)<p>Call me cynical, which is probably true, but I remember the time when the web was the playground of the geeks. Now it feels like it became the playground of business majors.
Back in the day this would have taken 15 minutes to download - seeing this appear instantly loses some of what it conveys.
Need some setTimeouts adding on those images.....
I mean, there are plenty of sites like this on Neocities [0] - which has a goal to be the New Geocities. :) If you seek it out, you can find the fun web again. But I do agree that it's a smaller and smaller fraction of the web. But with Facebook, why would people follow strangers on their websites when they can follow all their friends on Facebook?<p>[0] <a href="https://neocities.org/browse" rel="nofollow">https://neocities.org/browse</a>
I've been hoping that VR would be the next web in this sense, but haven't seen it happen yet. It would be so cool to have a world-wide fully open Second Life.
I had a few moments to work on tko (knockout 4) this morning and I just have to say how happy I am with the ko methodology. Not to knock (pardon the put) any of the more recent forays into js/web-ux , but holy smokes I’m satisfied with ko and excited about its future.
"Remember Jquery" doesn't fit there, it's still popular and kept current, as it should be, it's awesome and useful.<p>Also I still use FTP (secure FTP of course), I use it for smaller projects on shared hosting and so on. It's completely fine.
People never stopped making fun stuff on the web, it just doesn’t have the same 90s web aesthetic or artisanal handcrafted bespoke raw HTML/CSS/JS the author is nostalgic for, and there’s so much more content now that it gets drowned out.
huh? Since when was making blinking text and displaying clip arts fun? Even back in the day, you knew web as a platform was handicapped, when compared to the awesome expressiveness of Macromedia Flash.
It already is shit?<p>Web 1.0 was peak internet, when creativity was alive before normies and corporations started making every website 200MB of ad-loading javascript.