pretty sure the 20s is for AI
thecam@lemmy.world 1 year ago
.com boom in the 90s, NFT boom in the 20s.
pavnilschanda@lemmy.world 1 year ago
thecam@lemmy.world 1 year ago
.com boom in the 90s, NFT boom in the 20s.
pretty sure the 20s is for AI
glorious_albus@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Dot com wasn’t worthless or useless
thecam@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Not many people had their own website in the late 90s, same as today. Domain names are useful to some just like how some see NTFs are being useful.
Yeah people visit websites more than looking at NFTs. However some will prefer NFTs over physical collectiables. Just a preference.
atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
That’s… Not what the dot-com boom was.
negativeyoda@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Also, homie has obviously never heard of geocities… or livejournal
NorwegianBlues@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Your post is pretty nonsensical anyway, but if anything more people had their own websites as a proportion of the web, with Geocities and Angelfire etc. This was before social media, so to have a presence on the web you had to have your own site, and people did.
Moobythegoldensock@lemm.ee 1 year ago
You’re both correct. In the late 90s it was common to have your own webpage as a subdomain on someone else’s site, but not super common to have your own domain.
Facebook and Instagram are still basically web pages on someone else’s domain.
merc@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Yeah, it was a bubble. Dot com companies were worth less than investors hoped, but not worthless.
Many of the dot-com companies that survived the crash exceeded their bubble valuation. Amazon, for example is worth far more than it ever was in the bubble days. Same with eBay, Priceline, etc.
Yahoo is widely considered one of the biggest flops, but it survived the dot-com crash, dropped to just a few dollars a share, then eventually climbed back up over $40/share. Despite being massively overvalued in the bubble and then massively mismanaged after, it fundamentally had some value and people used it for years.