this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2023
363 points (94.4% liked)

Unpopular Opinion

6339 readers
47 users here now

Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!


How voting works:

Vote the opposite of the norm.


If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.



Guidelines:

Tag your post, if possible (not required)


  • If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
  • If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].


Rules:

1. NO POLITICS


Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.


2. Be civil.


Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...


Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.


5. No trolling.


This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.



Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Ignoring the security implications, I miss kb large old raw html websites that loaded instantly on DSL internet. Nowadays shit is too fancy because hardware allows that, but I feel we're just constantly running into more bugs first and then worry about them later.

Edit: I've thought more about it, and I think I just missed the simplicity of the internet back then. There's just too much bloat these days with ad trackers and misinformation. I kinda forgot just how bright and eye jarring most old UIs were lol.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DudeDudenson@lemmings.world 90 points 1 year ago (3 children)

You know what I miss? When information was condensed instead of spread out to insert more ads. When software willingly gave you all the options you could ever need instead of removing most of them because "people might get confused". When website took up the entire screen instead of a mobile wide strip in the middle because "it can be scary for people".

Fuck everyone who keeps lowering the bar of tech literacy just to appeal to the general public.

[–] UsernameIsTooLon@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I literally have a vertical monitor to avoid the middle strip of text problem. It especially sucks for higher resolution monitors, it just feels like so much wasted space on the left and right side of the article.

[–] DudeDudenson@lemmings.world 6 points 1 year ago

The most used e-commerce platform on my country does this for the map for in store pick ups when selecting where the package is sent. The map is basically a long vertical strip and the actual map area occupies maybe 10-5% of a 1440p monitor.

Drives me nuts every time I have to use it

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Tathas@programming.dev 6 points 1 year ago

Click next after each paragraph of the story so I can load more ads! And by paragraph, I mean one tag per sentence.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 67 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Not that unpopular an opinion I bet.

[–] UsernameIsTooLon@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Google thinks otherwise :(

[–] EditsHisComments@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Unfortunately, Google is also complicit in this

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] doppelgangmember@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I saw a web page from 1999 today and as a full stack dev I immediately clicked away bc obvi NSFW

BUT then I had the urge to go back to this simple ass web "site" and just admire it for a second like "wow, someone probably spent weeks on this 2 day design".

Tbh afterwards I was kind of in awe that every option was available on each page with no sidebars or extra clicks. Not slick but quick tho!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Endorkend@kbin.social 51 points 1 year ago (9 children)

Ignoring the security implications.

There are literally none with basic html.

It's when you started adding shit like Shockwave, javascript and the like, all massive security holes, things got dicey.

Plain old HTML, none what so ever.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] TootSweet@lemmy.world 41 points 1 year ago (3 children)
[–] kill_dash_nine@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 year ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] breakingcups@lemmy.world 36 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean, there are basically no security implications for plain html.

[–] UsernameIsTooLon@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh, I just thought older websites were less secure. But I guess now that I think about it, you only got viruses if you clicked on the sketchy links yourself.

[–] SmashingSquid@notyour.rodeo 32 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Most of the issue with loading times are the billion ads and trackers. There are sites I visit that load instantly with Adblock on but extremely slow without it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TheGreenGolem@lemm.ee 31 points 1 year ago (3 children)
[–] Nobody@lemmy.world 29 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Find the right webring, and you’d hit a treasure trove of content. Dig a little deeper and find something even more interesting. The pre-corporate takeover internet.

We talk about enshittification ruining everything, but Facebook and Web 2.0 started ripping out the heart of the internet. Everyone went along with it, and corporate claws sunk in. The fun internet got pushed aside for the ad-friendly internet.

[–] TheGiantKorean@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Speaking as a web developer - sorry.

[–] UsernameIsTooLon@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No need. As someone who understands web development enough to know I know nothing about web development, it makes sense to me why the internet is what it is today. It's all about establishing a brand and identity now so doing extra things can make you stand out.

While YouTube has gotten more sluggish over the years, I do think some recent changes like ambient mode have been pretty cool. I also support reasonable hardware requirements because things get obsolete over time.

I guess I just miss the simplicity of early internet browsing more compared to all the bloat that exists today.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There isn't a day I don't think about how annoying the modern web is. Fancy crap, GDPR, a trillion frameworks weighing 1mb+ each, a ton of useless extra info for SEO and whatnot. All to see the pure information I initially seeked saying "yes". Which could've been a 1kb site.

[–] Hubi@lemmy.world 43 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The GDPR is not annoying. The fact that it is necessary is annoying.

[–] Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 year ago

Truetrue. Yet it still doesn't serve much of a protection service. What should we care a about a tracking-cookie when most sites use multiple tracking-scripts anyway? Or force you to either accept or pay. Or simply deny entry at all.

I just need another plugin to block another thing...

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 19 points 1 year ago

Right there with you buddy.

Craigslist and McMaster are so efficient..

[–] folkrav@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I miss kb large old raw html websites that loaded instantly on DSL internet

Instantly? We had very different DSL connections 😳

[–] Tippon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 year ago

It depends on when you had it. I had a 4Mb connection when most people were still on dialup, and it flew.

[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What would stop an individual or company nowadays to build a pure html website? Isn't this what a "static site" is?

Isn't this what HUGO and Jekyll produce, only a little bit prettier?

[–] slazer2au@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Nothing. Warren Buffetts company Berkshire Hathaway has the most simple business's site of all time.

https://www.berkshirehathaway.com/

The fault is a combination of execs wanting a slick site, marketing wanting a highly SEO scoring page, and Devs wanting to play with web frameworks.

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hey, they even have an old-school tracker-free static advertisement image on that page. Now that's a classic.

[–] Changetheview@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I’d love to know how much they paid for it. Even part of the “message from warren” page too. Must have been a pretty penny. I bet a lot of pages would love to do static links in exchange for upfront fees similar to it.

[–] EvacuateSoul@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Geico is owned by them, so they may not have to pay.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] morphballganon@lemmynsfw.com 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I just learned about https://neocities.org/, seems up your alley

[–] Vegoon@feddit.de 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 11 points 1 year ago

I instantly hit the Firefox Reader Mode button or turn on Brave's accessibility reader. They cut all the crap out of most websites. Bonus is they often remove paywalls.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (4 children)

This web thing is okay, but it will never replace Gopher.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] RedStrider@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago
[–] whaleross@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago
[–] fernandu00@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago

Everything is a transpiled Rract SPA loaded with trackers ..want to read your neighbors blog? Suck these hundreds trackers ...

[–] PieMePlenty@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

You can still use old Gmail. I do. It's fast. It has no ads. It's amazing.

[–] theKalash@feddit.ch 11 points 1 year ago

Enjoy it while you still can.

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago

I like using email client software instead. It just uses Gmail as a backend and the inbox looks however I want it to look.

Plus, it works while offline on the train or with Amtrak's shitty WiFi

load more comments
view more: next ›