←back to thread

My 90s TV: Browse 90s Television

(my90stv.com)
527 points optimalsolver | 5 comments | 30 Jan 21 23:08 UTC | HN request time: 0.216s | source
Show context
personlurking ◴[31 Jan 21 02:09 UTC] No.25975086[source]▶
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)

replies(10): >>25976050 #>>25976617 #>>25976872 #>>25976885 #>>25977503 #>>25978623 #>>25978899 #>>25979171 #>>25979914 #>>25980252 #
onion2k ◴[31 Jan 21 07:24 UTC] No.25976885[source]▶
I want an internet of specialty sites, browsable curations, diversity of offering, freedom of choice, and full of the quirky/unusual.

You can have that. All you need to do is make sure the developers who make those sites get rich. Find the sites and tell your friends about them. Subscribe to their work. Buy their merch. Click on the ads. Pay them. Then everyone else will see that sort of site making bank, and they'll follow along with similar things.

The only reason the web is what it is today is because the money went to the walled gardens and social media sites. To change that, change where the money goes.

replies(2): >>25977213 #>>25978738 #
IndySun ◴[31 Jan 21 08:46 UTC] No.25977213[source]▶
"...To change that, change where the money goes..."

Creative work is currently having its sources of income decimated, from all sides. We should get used to reminiscing.

replies(1): >>25977955 #
dewey ◴[31 Jan 21 11:17 UTC] No.25977955[source]▶
> Creative work is currently having its sources of income decimated, from all sides. We should get used to reminiscing.

This is just anecdotal but I see a lot of very niche creative people making money that they wouldn't have made before through YouTube, Discord, Patreon, Gumroad etc.

I think the opposite is true, while in the past it was maybe PayPal there's a lot of ways to make money online that's very approachable for everyone.

replies(2): >>25978014 #>>25978751 #
1. Kye ◴[31 Jan 21 13:43 UTC] No.25978751[source]▶
It's still very hard to actually bridge the gap between putting something out there and getting people to pay for it. All those platforms did was expand the lucky few from .1% to 1% of people trying. A big jump, but few people make enough to cover the costs, much less live on it.
replies(2): >>25978921 #>>25978938 #
2. IndySun ◴[31 Jan 21 14:11 UTC] No.25978921[source]▶
Kye, Completely agree with this. Making it big as a creative remains elusive for but a few, and may actually be harder today due to your point (this plus the fact that powerful creative tools are in so many more people hands thus we have a glut/logjam of talent being overlooked).
3. ghaff ◴[31 Jan 21 14:13 UTC] No.25978938[source]▶
Arguably a lot of people buy into the buzz around becoming a Tik-Tok, YouTube, or whatever star when the reality is that it's about as likely for most as becoming a Hollywood star is.

Whatever the form, content by itself just doesn't pay a lot for most and never has. I just finished a new edition of a book of mine. It's valuable for "branding" (ugh term I know). But I'll directly make less money than from cranking out a blog post for some company.

replies(1): >>25979799 #
4. IndySun ◴[31 Jan 21 16:12 UTC] No.25979799[source]▶
Ghaff, some good points too. And am I reading you right; you're saying you could (are) potentially earn more from writing a (paid) blog post than from your own book?
replies(1): >>25979856 #
5. ghaff ◴[31 Jan 21 16:19 UTC] No.25979856{3}[source]▶
Yes. Exactly.

There are a bunch of reputational benefits to certain types of book writing which (probably) lead to significant career/comp benefits. But the direct money can be less than what companies will pay for a ghostwritten content marketing-type blog. Or even whatever a lot of salaried people earn for doing that sort of work on company time. There's a reason a lot of "creatives" end up working for corporate product companies as their day job.