Hacker News Reader

Comment by raesene9 | Hacker News Reader

My favourite 90's style website, that's still running, is http://www.armory.com/armory.html , complete with FTP Index and user finger files.

View on HN

Man I miss backspacing through a URL and sometimes hitting an FTP page with files I wasn't necessarily supposed to be able to download. Halcyon days.

Pointing ftp client to blahblahblah.com was like a treasure hunt.

or just a browser with ftp://

Funny, my first dial-up ISP was halcyon.com (later Northwest Nexus/WinStar) in the Seattle area around 1999/2000. Halcyon days indeed!

Can't forget https://stallman.org/ if we're talking about the 90s

Tbh I'll take that over any SPA that breaks my browser default behaviour.

My only complaint is it goes full wide screen. If he put a limit on the width the text expands to so it was readable on large screens that would be perfect.

No, the page layout is likely designed to be readable on anything that speaks HTTP. Including text-based browsers, mobile devices with low bandwidth and performance, screen readers, etc.

All you have to do to get the text width you want is resize your browser window.

None of those things are harmed by putting a maxwidth that limits the line length to something reasonable for the viewport size.

Have you ever met rms?

http://www.jwz.org/hacks/why-cooperation-with-rms-is-impossi...

for the uninitiated, you're looking for an audio file at the above link. you need to delete your HN referrer in order to do that because jwz is a "special" kind of adult.

For those who don't know how to do the above, simply open the link in a private window.

Or just copy it to the clipboard and paste.

Reminder / warning: jwz.org redirects incoming traffic from HN to an NSFW image.

You're spoiling the fun!

On second thought, I'd rather see the hairy nut in an egg cup than have to listen to RMS singing that.

The trouble is that everyone else's idea of "reasonable" is about 1/3 of what I want. You can all make your browsers narrower, but I've got no way to make your sites wider :(.

But then you have to resize it every time you visit a site that can actually make use of the full width, which is frustrating.

Don't forget Larry Wall's page: http://www.wall.org/~larry/ :-)

OMG, I forgot about GeekCode :)

Maddox is a huge ass but his site is still updated from time to time

http://maddox.xmission.com/

He has posts from 1998 to 2020 but I'd say he still actively posts. He's just run out of things to say. lol

My gosh, I forgot about this one! Thanks for reminding me/us!

Blocked by our company filter as an "adult" resource, so you might have to add a NSFW warning there.

There's nothing actually NSFW at the link, just your filter being overzealous

Perhaps they are confusing it with the San Francisco Armory, a historic building the NIMBY neighbors blocked from being converted into housing so a porn company bought it instead and turned it into a production company instead.

Not anymore I’m afraid. Sold in 2018

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Armory

They used to host their own servers there, but it went the way of the cloud.

Yes. I guess a few years of this was more than even the NIMBYs could take. It's now owned by some capital group seeking to build housing there, but new NIMBYs will come to the fore to block it, and the combo of declining SF real estate prices and rising interest rates may well make the project unviable, since a developer has to pay interest for a decade or more while stalling tactics delay approval.

Can't think why they'd add NSFW to that site, it's a plain text site primarily. I guess there may be something NSFW in the FTP archive somewhere, but I think that's probably an overactive filter.

> Can't think why they'd add NSFW to that site

As someone already mentioned nearby in the thread it could easily be something in the “purity test” content that has tripped an automatic naughty word filter.

It could even be the name of the site, depending on the location weapons and such might be considered NSFW (or for overly strict companies, not-relevant-for-work-we-dont-know-why-you-are-wanting-to-look-at-it-in-work-time!).

The Armory is a long-time host of various purity tests[1], which is probably why it's filtered.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purity_test

If you'd actually checked the site you'd know it wasn't NSFW.

They'd have to be able to access it to know that...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com