zlacker

[return to "My 90s TV: Browse 90s Television"]
1. person+fi[view] [source] 2021-01-31 02:09:11
>>optima+(OP)
I realize this is a site about the past, but I really hope this is the future. I want an internet of specialty sites, browsable curations, diversity of offering, freedom of choice, and full of the quirky/unusual. It might have to do with growing up in the 90s and experiencing that kind of world wide web, w/o walled gardens.

Several years back, perhaps even via an HN post or comment, I came across a blog, hosted on a university network (IIRC, perhaps related to media studies). The page consisted of a group of possibly graduate students contributing some of the weirdest and most obscure media I've ever seen online. Nothing obscene and nothing seemingly new/current, so it was rather hipster in that sense, but I kick myself for not having saved the URL.

Nothing says I need to use walled gardens or get my news from the big networks, but I often feel I'm being pointed that way. In the end, I just want something different than what's usually being served up.

(It doesn't escape me that this 90's TV site is full of walled garden/big network type content of the time)

◧◩
2. tibors+8m1[view] [source] 2021-01-31 14:44:43
>>person+fi
In this age of "infinite" content curation is really important. Inspired by the 90's MTV experience I've built https://humanmusic.tv/ to replicate that but with indie music from the last 10 years.

I'm also running a web crawler to discover fresh music videos from various music blogs.

◧◩◪
3. api+zr1[view] [source] 2021-01-31 15:32:07
>>tibors+8m1
I wonder if a curated directory like the original 90s Yahoo! could work and experience a renaissance today? I could see that being more useful than search, honestly. Search today is just polluted with SEO trash.
◧◩◪◨
4. ghaff+is1[view] [source] 2021-01-31 15:37:44
>>api+zr1
Define "work." A curated directory for some niche topic would definitely be of interest to people involved with that niche topic. And, depending on the topic, it might even serve as a decently profitable sideline for someone. But it certainly wouldn't be Yahoo! v. 2.
[go to top]