| ▲ | raw_anon_1111 15 hours ago |
| So exactly when was this? Even Geocities was full of punch the monkey ads and the web was inundated with X10 pop under ads. Right before the web became a thing, Usenet was starting to become inundated with spam |
|
| ▲ | butlike 14 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Geocities ran ads, but the user's page was still in the spirit of OPs comment. I'd say that lasted until the late 00's. Around 2009. I partially blame the rise of Facebook for the proliferation of "social," though, people tend to get bored with _anything_ if it stagnates too long. Regardless, the internet was inherently social before that; they only changed the landscape. Not for the better in my eyes (though hindsight's 20/20). |
|
| ▲ | tagami 15 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Pre-1995 |
| |
| ▲ | TheOtherHobbes 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It was 96/97. I remember thinking "The drones are moving in on this." Canter and Siegel had nuked Usenet in 1994, and banners were invented in 1994 by Hotwired. But it took a while for the tech to eat the web, because the web was a niche interest for the first few years. During that time you could - and a lot of people did - put together a simple site with a text editor and free hosting supplied by your ISP. | |
| ▲ | alephnerd 15 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The majority of internet users wouldn't have experienced that supposed world. The median age in the US in 39, which means at least half of all Americans would have been in elementary school or not around during that supposed era of the internet, and the mass adoption of the internet only really began in earnest in the early 2000s. | | |
| ▲ | jodrellblank 13 hours ago | parent [-] | | > "that supposed world ... that supposed era of the internet" "Supposed: Presumed to be true or real without conclusive evidence". You think there isn't conclusive evidence that the internet existed before 1995? o_O | | |
|
|
|
| ▲ | dfxm12 14 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| There are distinctions to be made between rotating/static display ads, spam and everything (i.e., user surveillance) that encompasses digital advertising today. Personally, ads don't bother me. Spam is annoying in terms of UX. But really, user surveillance is what we need to worry about in terms of UX, our privacy, security, etc. |
| |
| ▲ | Terr_ 13 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I think there's a worse-step beyond passive surveillance, where ad-networks function as a channel for viruses that seek to change your computer, along with scams and phishing. Ad-blocking--refusing to run their code--is a simply common sense when the networks are not liable for ensuring that the code they send is not malicious. | |
| ▲ | 14 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
