
Ask HN: How did you browse the internet before aggregators and social media? - PlaceboGazebo
I&#x27;m afraid that as I&#x27;ve grown up with Facebook and then spent my idle hours in undergrad on Reddit and related sites, I&#x27;ve never really learned (or forgotten) how to browse the web itself - a skill that seems to be becoming increasingly important in the face of nebulous algorithms managing the information we see on larger sites.
======
BjoernKW
Apart from search engines and directories such as AltaVista and Yahoo and
later obviously Google, bulletin board systems and Usenet were popular ways of
getting and recommending new content on the Internet.

Another - somewhat quirky - concept was called 'webrings':
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webring](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webring)

These allowed websites with related or similar content (though the definition
of what would be similar enough to qualify could vary quite a bit) to link to
a 'next' and a 'previous' site. This obviously didn't scale to an
exponentially growing web but it allowed for serendipitous content discovery,
which could be quite delightful sometimes (and disturbing at other times).

~~~
aurenen
That's what I used, the webrings. I did a lot of link hopping from people's
amateur sites because they all had "Links Out" pages, and there was a lot of
website social circles that operated with message boards and webrings.

------
ccajas
I was one of the many millions that got introduced to the internet via AOL. In
the days of MySpace I just entered stuff on Google, and found many different
forums related to my topics of interest. Or before that time, it was HotBot,
Altavista and Lycos in that order.

The most social things I could think of in the late 90s, besides chatrooms and
IM, were simple bulletin board systems (with the branched hierarchy style of
posts like Reddit or HN), guestbooks (one-way shoutboxes, easy to spam links),
or webrings.

Webrings were a cool concept because it ties in people with a common interest,
but without being tightly dependent on where your site is hosted on. Your site
or blog could be hosted anywhere, you'd just have to copy and paste some code
for the link and button to lead you to the directory.

Similar ideas propped up in other communities, like fandoms of a fictional
work, where they linked other websites of the same fandom via buttons with a
unique design.

------
cimmanom
Hyperlinks. Yup, the original raison d'etre of HTML. One site that discussed a
topic would link inline to other sites or articles about the topic. Or one
silly site would link to others.

In the heyday of the early blogging movement, "blogrolls" (links to other
blogs the author followed) were common. So were archives categorized by date,
category, and eventually tags. And "related posts" widgets.

As to where you could get started, a topic in mind and a search on your engine
of choice would usually get you going. Or a visit to the Yahoo directory. Or
bookmarks of your favorite frequently-updated sites.

I'm not sure exactly what skill you're looking for. A skill for finding things
to read/watch to keep you occupied? Doing research or finding answers to
questions online? Something else?

------
LarryMade2
Yahoo and Altavista for searching.

Social was mainly USENET newsgroups and email lists...

Many websites offered links sections to link to othe similar related things.

Some websites also were part of "ring networks" which would chain the websites
together with web plugins and a database of member sites so fans could tour
the ring members.

My site still uses a lot of links (I need to go through those...), example:

[http://portcommodore.com/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=larry:comp:sta...](http://portcommodore.com/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=larry:comp:start)

------
ducatdusk
I recall using Stumbleupon quite a bit to find random sites.

I think there always has been some sort of 'social' for site discovery
(Fark/Slashdot etc), it was just more diverse than it is now.

------
dictum
Having way more fun.

* * *

I got my first computer right at the end of the dotcom bubble era but before
the social network era. As I remember it, search engines (including Google)
returned way more semi-random results, and seemed to give less weight to big-
brand websites. So even in page 1 or 2 you would get links to small websites,
often published by individuals. There was SEO spam but it seemed more overt
and hence, more avoidable (it wasn't the kind of content that's ostensibly
original, but made specifically to rank well and get ad money.)

After a while, blogs became a viable way to find interesting content -
bloggers often published commentary on stuff they'd seen.

YouTube reminds me of this flow sometimes - you can watch mildly interesting
stuff for hours - but it seems increasingly optimized for a different flow, so
it recommends stuff that's not exactly interesting, but meets some business
criteria. Wikipedia too, but it lacks the different voices/tones/styles that
you can see in different websites.

Partly because of this background, FB never had me - I was partial to Twitter
exactly because it kept this "Internet as a separate place with interesting
stuff to see" feeling. FB wanted credentials, in-grouping, established
traditions.

------
rikkhill
Word of mouth. In the halcyon days of the late 90s, the social aspects of the
internet were a lot more deliberate. You'd belong to online communities or
established social groups, and people would actively tell other people they
knew online about things they'd found in the weirder corners of the internet.
You couldn't just blast out a context-free link to everyone you knew and have
the platform take care of assembling a preview. It had to be worth your time
to share, and people would complain if you spammed them with junk.

"Worth your time" is a pretty relative notion, though. It's worth mentioning
that the web of 15-20 years ago was of very little "value" compared to what we
have today. Some links I remember sharing on a mailing list circa 2000 include
the Poorly Drawn Lamp Page [1] and the William Shatner Acting Simulator [2]
(warning: the depiction of Sulu has not aged well).

[1] -
[http://www.flamingmayo.com/poorlydrawnlamps/](http://www.flamingmayo.com/poorlydrawnlamps/)

[2] - [http://simshatner.fanspace.com/](http://simshatner.fanspace.com/)

~~~
potta_coffee
This, and webrings.

------
throwaway_atl
I remember someone giving me a copy of the Internet Yellow Pages back in '96
or so. It looked like the Yellow Pages you get for phones, but it had about
10,000 or so links grouped by category (e.g. astronomy, comics, newsgroups). I
would sit down with that and just start exploring.

Later on sites like Yahoo, AltaVista and Lycos would help you find
information.

You also had webrings to lead you around.

It used to be pretty fun.

------
pageandrew
I was active on web forums related to my interests, and IRC channels generally
stemming off of those.

My internet browsing was much more contained to the network of sites that I
was already aware of.

This was in 2006/2007 when I first started using the internet. The aggregators
definitely existed back then, but I wasn't aware of them.

------
pc2g4d
Search Altavista/Hotbot/Dogpile/Lycos, wind up somewhere on Geocities or a
million independent sites, jump around on a webring that it was part of. That
was one way. Webring.org is even still running. The webring my site was on is
still accessible over the original URL: [http://webring.org/cgi-
bin/webring?ring=daddyo&list](http://webring.org/cgi-
bin/webring?ring=daddyo&list) (it redirects, though)

There was also just finding some news sites and returning to them often. I
would start out at the news.com and download.com CNet sites.

Slashdot came later for me.

------
imauld
StumbleUpon and Googling random things I was either interested in or had
randomly entered my mind. Lots of older sites also had a links section with
links to either relevant stuff or just other things the site owner was in to.

------
isthatart
I could paraphrase this as: I've grown up with the map, I've never really
learned how to explore the territory.

As any bureaucracy knows, who makes the map controls the territory :)

------
fern12
My favorites were VersionTracker and the MacAddict forums. A lot of the
comments here on HN remind me of the MA forums, which is great.

------
pmiller2
I started at the Yahoo! directory and built up a list of bookmarks (which I
stored in a bookmarks.html) file.

------
brudgers
Webrings.

------
DoreenMichele
I'm a social creature. I have a long history of being involved in various
online communities and being interested in what individuals link to, whether
they posted it to the front page or linked it in comments.

The degree of my interest is partly based on personal relevance and partly
based on "reputation" of the poster, for lack of a better term.

If I know someone has a strong background in something and/or posts a lot on
the topic, I may click into something they posted in part because they posted
it. This can be true in spite of personal friction between us or me having a
negative view of them or their behavior.

It isn't a case of "I like them personally or see them as a friend, so I check
their links." It is very much "I believe them to be knowledgeable about X
topic and I am interested in X topic."

If I don't have any idea who they are but they wrote an interesting comment
and linked something within that comment, I may take a peek for that reason.

Conversely, if I have reason to believe they are pushing an agenda in a
completely disrespectful fashion and/or "don't confuse me with the facts, my
mind is made up" kind of way, I may skip their links because it is probably
fruit of the poison seed. On HN, I occasionally run across, for example, angry
"feminist" handles who are just here to spew manhating venom. The content they
want promoted here is often vile and far worse than merely a waste of my time.
I may feel like I need a shower after being exposed. No thank you.

I sometimes know of someone who is a weird intersection between I respect
their knowledge and I cringe at their blatant toxic behavior. That gets tricky
at times. But, most of the time, checking information posted by someone who
has a strong background works well as a filter for finding good information
without wasting a whole lot of my time.

I currently spend time on HN, twitter and reddit. You can kind of curate
twitter content because what is in your feed is largely based on who you
follow. I unfollow people who fill my timeline with things I find
objectionable and I keep an eye out for interesting accounts.

On reddit, I avoid the front page and gravitate towards small out of the way
subreddits pertinent to my interests. My recent experience of reddit has been
overall positive. The first time I tried it, it lived down to its nasty
reputation. This time has been completely different and it has a lot to do
with how I am interacting with the site.

I'm strongly interested in people. That goes a long way towards exposing me to
diverse content.

------
randomerr
In the very early days we used BBS that we dialed or telnet'ed into. These
were text systems where you chat and leave messages about you had found. If
you search around you can find web interfaces that will let you telnet into
some them.
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulletin_board_system](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulletin_board_system))

After that there were USENET/Newsgroups. Its a universal discussion board. You
can still get to it by using 'news reader' software package and finding an
open server. You can also pay for access but unless you really need the need
the history ::cough:: or special content it's not worth it. Otherwise use
Google Groups which is both a USENET reader and it's forum system
([https://groups.google.com/](https://groups.google.com/)).

Yahoo.com was the best directory at the
time.([http://web.archive.org/web/19970124192912/http://www10.yahoo...](http://web.archive.org/web/19970124192912/http://www10.yahoo.com:80/))
Back in the day there were _few_ enough major websites that Yahoo had time to
review and categorized sites by hand. As Yahoo became more of a search engine
company and less of a director the Mozzill foundation created DMOZ.org.

DMOZ was supposed to be the 'democratic' replacement for Yahoo. With the open
nature of the internet bad player starting getting up voted and it became
spammed horribly. Plus search engine were getting big. It never really took
off.

In between Yahoo being the dominate directory and Google trying to become the
biggest search engine I like sites such as Webcrawler.com and Lycos.com.
They're both still around. If I remember correctly Webcrawler still crawls
site but it so back logged that its like 1-2 year behind. Lycos stopped doing
it's crawls for a while was feed from Google search results. But it seems that
Lycos started doing it's crawls again but with a really engine.

Finally we used a real time text chat system called IRC
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Relay_Chat](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Relay_Chat)).
I loved using mIRC on Windows
3.1.([https://www.mirc.com/](https://www.mirc.com/)) It was simple and fast.
But by modern standards it not very intuitive. Think of Discord where you can
have unfiltered channels but with almost no filters.

FYI: if you want to have some fun check out Microsoft Comic Chat. It worked on
IRC as well
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Comic_Chat](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Comic_Chat)).
That was abused so badly at the time.

~~~
joezydeco
The Comic Chat abuse continues daily at
[http://www.jerkcity.com](http://www.jerkcity.com). Stop on by!

------
joezydeco
Memepool.

