Old Internet Files(rscott.org)
rscott.org
Old Internet Files
https://rscott.org/OldInternetFiles/
31 comments
Don't know why I didn't register until 1997, but I guess by then it'd grown way too big to keep casual copies lying around.
It would be fun to run a mini web crawler against these old domains, and see if any are still hosting circa 1990s content.
Ah. Hello.com
If only I had kept that.
If only I had kept that.
I like how basic his website is. Simple and familiar.
I completely agree, but providing a similar interface today, and everyone cry out loud! The key here is long time. This page is ready to be displayed for centuries. What with this dependency bootstrapped/vue/meteor/angular stuffs of today. Those from last years feels already outdated.
A webpage should always displays, including when dependencies are missing, javascript disabled.
A great help is w3m
Fairly familiar over Tor too, just it's Immunify360 serving a google recaptcha instead of cloudflare (who rarely do now, in my experience).
this trend is coming back in the design world as brutalism (in the same vein as brutalist architecture).
this site has a lot of examples: http://brutalistwebsites.com (HN is actually one of the examples listed)
this site has a lot of examples: http://brutalistwebsites.com (HN is actually one of the examples listed)
I don't think that's the same. The website linked by this post has barely, if any, design (in form of CSS or otherwise) at all. It's not "brutalist", it's whatever the default browser layout and settings are.
That's how the web and HTML used to work: Focus almost entirely on content, semantic markup, the browser mostly decides how to present that information to you--along with your personal preferences.
So "brutalist" design does not apply, because there is no (visual) design involved.
That's how the web and HTML used to work: Focus almost entirely on content, semantic markup, the browser mostly decides how to present that information to you--along with your personal preferences.
So "brutalist" design does not apply, because there is no (visual) design involved.
> It's not "brutalist", it's whatever the default browser layout and settings are.
Exactly. Just like brutalist architecture, an interior might expose a steel frame and the pipes, brutalist websites expose the HTML and base structure. Not all brutalist sites are completely stripped down this much but they have elements and expand on it.
Exactly. Just like brutalist architecture, an interior might expose a steel frame and the pipes, brutalist websites expose the HTML and base structure. Not all brutalist sites are completely stripped down this much but they have elements and expand on it.
There are definitely similarities between brutalist architecture and brutalist web design, but it's more of a comparison rather than an over-arching design principal.
Brutalist architecture was largely driven by enabling concrete technology. Concrete was previously used as a purely structural element, but as it advanced, architects realized it could be used as an aesthetic. IMHO, I believe that when these architects built these buildings, they were aiming for something more human, like shaped clay, but their efforts simply failed, and they created something entirely different. In fact, there was never any coherent brutalist architecture "movement", most brutalist buildings were deemed so long after they were built, largely because they appeared foreboding, intense, and used large quantities of concrete. (yes, there are plenty of "brutalist" buildings that don't heavily rely on concrete, but there's no question that many of the most famous buildings do so).
So I don't think brutalist architectural design necessarily means exposing the "base structure". I would not consider the pompidou center as brutalist.
Brutalist web design is also foreboding and intense, but that is really the end of their similarities. Many brutalist web designs intentionally create a disjointed feeling, overlapping text, mismatched fonts, large variations in color and font-size, are intentionally used to create a particular feeling of haphazardness and authenticity. I don't think brutalist architectural design carried that same intent.
Brutalist architecture was largely driven by enabling concrete technology. Concrete was previously used as a purely structural element, but as it advanced, architects realized it could be used as an aesthetic. IMHO, I believe that when these architects built these buildings, they were aiming for something more human, like shaped clay, but their efforts simply failed, and they created something entirely different. In fact, there was never any coherent brutalist architecture "movement", most brutalist buildings were deemed so long after they were built, largely because they appeared foreboding, intense, and used large quantities of concrete. (yes, there are plenty of "brutalist" buildings that don't heavily rely on concrete, but there's no question that many of the most famous buildings do so).
So I don't think brutalist architectural design necessarily means exposing the "base structure". I would not consider the pompidou center as brutalist.
Brutalist web design is also foreboding and intense, but that is really the end of their similarities. Many brutalist web designs intentionally create a disjointed feeling, overlapping text, mismatched fonts, large variations in color and font-size, are intentionally used to create a particular feeling of haphazardness and authenticity. I don't think brutalist architectural design carried that same intent.
should these be shared with the internet archive?
Would be interesting to fill in the gaps for different countries - Ireland still has plenty of people around that probably have relevant files from the late 80s / 90s (if they went searching)...
Would be interesting to fill in the gaps for different countries - Ireland still has plenty of people around that probably have relevant files from the late 80s / 90s (if they went searching)...
You can easily submit a link to the archive with a simple url call: https://web.archive.org/save/https://rscott.org/OldInternetF...
As a bookmarklet:
javascript:void(window.open('https://web.archive.org/save/'+location.href));
As a bookmarklet:
javascript:void(window.open('https://web.archive.org/save/'+location.href));
Seeing "domain-contacts.txt" reminded how much simpler the internet used to be. Imagine not being afraid of giving out your contact info to the whole internet!
I'm not sure if the people who participated at the time would ever have imagined the need for whois anonymizers and weird tricks to keep your email address from being picked up by robots and spiders.
I'm not sure if the people who participated at the time would ever have imagined the need for whois anonymizers and weird tricks to keep your email address from being picked up by robots and spiders.
A lot of registrars get away with selling WHOIS privacy packages, but now thanks to the GDPR, most personally identifying whois data is private by default.
I would get contacted occasionally about selling domain names. I did take one company up on their offer for $10k. In retrospect, I do kinda regret selling that name. It was one of the rare six-character long .com domains.
I would get contacted occasionally about selling domain names. I did take one company up on their offer for $10k. In retrospect, I do kinda regret selling that name. It was one of the rare six-character long .com domains.
I'm now imagining what someone from those days would make of your post about their contact info being picked up by "robots and spiders." :D
Web Spiders have been around since ‘94 and the spider terminology for mapping networks is even older so they’d likely get it.
Oh geez. Webcrawler, and robots.txt. There was no SEO, just "don't overwhelm my modem / ISDN connection / T1". It's been a while!
A lot more interesting protocols too! I miss gopher & finger
if the people who participated at the time would ever have imagined the need for whois anonymizers and weird tricks to keep your email address from being picked up by robots and spiders.
My name is in there. People easily imagined these things and more, they're not hard to imagine.
My name is in there. People easily imagined these things and more, they're not hard to imagine.
> Seeing "domain-contacts.txt" reminded how much simpler the internet used to be. Imagine not being afraid of giving out your contact info to the whole internet!
ARPA (well, the ARPANET NIC at SRI) maintained a printed book of everyone (who wanted to be listed) on the ARPANET: name, phone number, mail address, physical address. The first one was about 1/2 an inch thick, the second one (around 1978 or 79?) about twice that...and then after that they gave up. I think I still have mine someplace.
(ARPA changed their name to DARPA at some point for reasons unknown to me)
ARPA (well, the ARPANET NIC at SRI) maintained a printed book of everyone (who wanted to be listed) on the ARPANET: name, phone number, mail address, physical address. The first one was about 1/2 an inch thick, the second one (around 1978 or 79?) about twice that...and then after that they gave up. I think I still have mine someplace.
(ARPA changed their name to DARPA at some point for reasons unknown to me)
Regarding why DARPA changed their name, it was because of a change in focus. Originally they were much broader and were also involved with early projects related to space and nuclear test monitoring, among others. Around 1970 ARPA was consolidated and these responsibilities were transferred to other agencies (NASA and NNSA in the cases that I mentioned), with ARPA then focusing mostly on defence related research and becoming DARPA.
here's a copy of HOSTS.TXT from 1982 and 1983:
https://emaillab.jp/dns/hosts/
and from 1985: https://emaillab.jp/pub/hosts/19850322/HOSTS.TXT
https://emaillab.jp/dns/hosts/
and from 1985: https://emaillab.jp/pub/hosts/19850322/HOSTS.TXT
[deleted]
SOUP.ORG in the first domain.info file ... anyone know what that was? It now redirects to an actual soup place.
Check out the guy who still owns milk.com:
http://milk.com/value/
Jesus.com was once owned by a guy who offered "Showers with Jesus" (he had long hair). ... or was it baths with Jesus. It was one of those.
http://milk.com/value/
Jesus.com was once owned by a guy who offered "Showers with Jesus" (he had long hair). ... or was it baths with Jesus. It was one of those.
I found a couple references, seems like it was some dial-in public-access unix machine at Rutgers?
http://utzoo.superglobalmegacorp.com/usenet/news100f1/b123/c...
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/net.news.config/Zmx4...
https://www.cs.rutgers.edu/~cwm/NetStuff/Old-Me-Postings/com...
http://utzoo.superglobalmegacorp.com/usenet/news100f1/b123/c...
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/net.news.config/Zmx4...
https://www.cs.rutgers.edu/~cwm/NetStuff/Old-Me-Postings/com...
http://web.archive.org/web/19980210071108/http://www.soup.or...
looks like TIAC (The Internet Access Company), an old ISP. Wow, I haven't seen a reference to Erol's in forever...
looks like TIAC (The Internet Access Company), an old ISP. Wow, I haven't seen a reference to Erol's in forever...
Ah, I remember when you could get a full list of com domains from the Internic. Hell, I remember when SRI-NIC.ARPA was a root name server. I forget exactly when they stopped the ability to ftp that.
Interesting looking at the COM zone for August 1995 and June 1996. In August 1995, bulletproof.com, foolproof.com, and fool-proof.com were all registered - but not proof.com. Proof.com was registered February 3rd, 1996 (I applied for it the same day but didn't get it, they must have beat me by an hour or two). By June 1996, not only were all the above registered in the proof.com namespace, but also babyproof.com, birdproof.com, crashproof.com, cyberproof.com, digitalproof.com etc.
Of course if I knew back in February 1996 how valuable good .com names would be in a few years, I would have registered a bunch more.
Interesting looking at the COM zone for August 1995 and June 1996. In August 1995, bulletproof.com, foolproof.com, and fool-proof.com were all registered - but not proof.com. Proof.com was registered February 3rd, 1996 (I applied for it the same day but didn't get it, they must have beat me by an hour or two). By June 1996, not only were all the above registered in the proof.com namespace, but also babyproof.com, birdproof.com, crashproof.com, cyberproof.com, digitalproof.com etc.
Of course if I knew back in February 1996 how valuable good .com names would be in a few years, I would have registered a bunch more.
You can still access com.zone [1], you have to fill a form and have a phone call with verisign and you get access to a good old FTP with a daily dump.
Some other TLDs gives access through Centralized Zone Data Service [2]. Some deny access, like ca.zone.
But I get what you mean, it was really publicly available.
[1] https://www.verisign.com/en_US/channel-resources/domain-regi...
[2] https://czds.icann.org/en
Some other TLDs gives access through Centralized Zone Data Service [2]. Some deny access, like ca.zone.
But I get what you mean, it was really publicly available.
[1] https://www.verisign.com/en_US/channel-resources/domain-regi...
[2] https://czds.icann.org/en
Hah, there's my domain, from 1996:
REALMS.ORG
Admin: Diederich, Dana [email protected] (601)374-6510 ...
I actually started the process of acquiring realms.org in 1994. At the time, you sent an e-mail to 'a guy' in DC. It took some time, but I finally got it registered in 1995. It was, of course, a free service.
REALMS.ORG
Admin: Diederich, Dana [email protected] (601)374-6510 ...
I actually started the process of acquiring realms.org in 1994. At the time, you sent an e-mail to 'a guy' in DC. It took some time, but I finally got it registered in 1995. It was, of course, a free service.
I was surprised to find my name in the "contacts" list. I guess I'm KK35. Is that a WHOIS thing or something?