Comment on [deleted]

• deur@feddit.nl ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Lol this is some weird out of touch take if I’ve ever seen one

  source

  • memfree@piefed.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Ah, yes, I remember those days with the text-only LYNX browser from the unix terminal and the joy of Netscape Navigator on machines that could handle windows. Searching was difficult until there was Alta Vista, which was AMAZING compared to the competition, but even it failed for D&D-style gamers who tried to search for "role playing games" and got back a list of a million sex sites and zero visible pen/paper/dice games. Happily, you could add boolean operator rules to get rid of some of that (NOT sex NOT babes NOT XXX) -- but you'd either be typing a lot of naughty words to skip or you'd have to remember the sites that catered to RPGs because searching could be very hit or miss.

    source
• rc__buggy@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Well, yes.

  Human curated but now my connection is faster than what some of the sites I visit can serve.

  source
• AusatKeyboardPremi@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  I don’t know how you arrived at this based on what @TheFeatureCreature@lemmy.ca was saying.

  Connection strength is a network/infrastructure problem while what was being said in the original comment is an application/usage one.

  The other part of your statement can be solved using a search engine which restricts itself to just searches and not distract itself with ads and AI. But evidently such a product is hard to build in today’s world.

  source