6 ms·

Hold on, who is behind https://archiveteam.org https://archiveteam.org? Folks, careful what extensions you add.

by unityByFreedom 6y ago

neolog 6y ago
The "who we are" link on that page answers your questions.
- blagie 6y ago
  I'm not questioning this particular site, but if you're unfamiliar with a project, trusting a "who we are" link is just about the worst way to verify it. You're bound to be p4wn3d. Anyone can claim to be anyone. Personally, I'd look for a link from e.g. eff.org, or a similar trusted site. Why should you trust me? I'm Larry Page. Why should you trust that I'm Larry Page? Simple. Look at the "Who am I" part of this post. Who am I: Larry Page, obviously. As a footnote, I'd never run something like this on my computer, but if it's just IPs you want, an RPi image would get you my IP.
  - neolog 6y ago
    I don't think I've ever seen a webpage that claims to be owned by someone other than the real owner, aside from typosquat phishing sites.
    - djhn 6y ago
      I reckon scam sites pretending to be reputable newspapers and mimicking their layout and contents to push investment scams via social media ads should qualify. And heck, any and all phishing sites, by definition. So millions of websites?
  - unityByFreedom 6y ago
    Exactly. This "group" is run by one person and an above comment claims it's one of the most reputable tech organizations. I think not since I've never heard of them and I've read tech news daily for the last two decades. I can't think of why someone would try to tell a techie that a certain unknown tech org is reputable unless they were advertising for it.
    - sellyme 6y ago
      > I think not since I've never heard of them and I've read tech news daily for the last two decades. That's weird, because they seem to have quite a lot of coverage in major tech news sites: https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/In_The_Media https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/In_The_Media
    - pfranz 6y ago
      They've been around for over a decade and every time a service shuts down and pulls their content there's always a mention of ArchiveTeam trying to coordinate an archive (negotiating end dates, any limiting or throttling with backup, asking for help). I've used them a bunch of times over the years when I see a thread like this. Just search this forum and you'll see them pop up for things like: imdb forums, coursera courses, soundcloud, tumblr's nsfw content, friendster, google reader archives.
    - vidarh 6y ago
      This just suggests to me you've not paid attention to news reports around big services shutting down, as Archive Team gets brought up regularly in those instances. Nothing wrong with that, and asking the question is fair enough, but doubling down on it in the face of being given references to who they are that are easy to verify gets a bit tiresome. Especially since this is a group prominent enough to have a brief but well cited Wikipedia page [1] with references to media appearances in Wired, The Register, PC World, Technology Review, OnTheMedia, Techdirt, BBC, RadioNZ, CBC, New Scientist and others. You can also find Jason Scott on HN [2], and his comments will point you to a number of other HN threads discussing archival, some of which are relevant to Archive Team. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archive_Team https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archive_Team [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=textfiles https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=textfiles
  - patd 6y ago
    https://help.archive.org/hc/en-us/articles/360001513491-Save-Pages-in-the-Wayback-Machine https://help.archive.org/hc/en-us/articles/360001513491-Save... They point to the Archive Team in point 4
  - billpg 6y ago
    I wonder why team.archive.org wasn't used.
sellyme 6y ago
Archive Team is probably one of the most reputable organisations on the internet at this point. Being careful is great, but when you yourself linked to a page that provides an extraordinary amount of information explaining exactly who they are and what they're doing (plus the source code to prove it!), it comes across as fearmongering.
- unityByFreedom 6y ago
  Most reputable? I don't think so. Archive.org and EFF are far more well known. Also, when I wrote this comment, the home page 404'ed for me. Naming yourself after a well known org and adding "team" after it doesn't sit well with me.
  - ajayyy 6y ago
    The name "archive" isn't reserved for the Internet Archive. ArchiveTeam is not an organisation, just a group of volunteers.
  - sellyme 6y ago
    > Naming yourself after a well known org They're named after the concept of archiving things, as the entire point of the group is to archive things. Archive Team itself is extremely well-known and has been the primary force archiving shut-down websites for over a decade. The 1TB Geocities archive - possibly the most famous website archival project ever - was their work.
  - 13rac1 6y ago
    Jason Scott created Archive Team. He works at the Internet Archive (archive.org). Archive Team is a community project kept distinct from his work. * https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/Who_We_Are https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/Who_We_Are > This project is composed of volunteers, currently coordinated by Jason Scott. * https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/User:Jscott https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/User:Jscott * https://twitter.com/textfiles https://twitter.com/textfiles > Proprietor of http://TEXTFILES.COM http://TEXTFILES.COM, historian, filmmaker, archivist, storyteller. Works on/for the Internet Archive. Rank Amateur.
cmeacham98 6y ago
It isn't an extension, it's a VM image. Unless you believe they possess and are publicly distributing an unpatched VM breakout the worst it can do is maliciously use your internet connection.
textfiles 6y ago
oh no he's onto us boys
- FriendlyNormie 6y ago
  Oh nice, you’re ridiculing someone who is afraid of your sketchy as fuck app and you’re making no attempt to demonstrate that he’s wrong. I definitely trust you now. Dumb faggot

Hold on, who is behind https://archiveteam.org https://archiveteam.org? Folks, careful what extensions you add.

neolog 6y ago

The "who we are" link on that page answers your questions.

blagie 6y ago
I'm not questioning this particular site, but if you're unfamiliar with a project, trusting a "who we are" link is just about the worst way to verify it. You're bound to be p4wn3d. Anyone can claim to be anyone. Personally, I'd look for a link from e.g. eff.org, or a similar trusted site. Why should you trust me? I'm Larry Page. Why should you trust that I'm Larry Page? Simple. Look at the "Who am I" part of this post. Who am I: Larry Page, obviously. As a footnote, I'd never run something like this on my computer, but if it's just IPs you want, an RPi image would get you my IP.
- neolog 6y ago
  I don't think I've ever seen a webpage that claims to be owned by someone other than the real owner, aside from typosquat phishing sites.
  - djhn 6y ago
    I reckon scam sites pretending to be reputable newspapers and mimicking their layout and contents to push investment scams via social media ads should qualify. And heck, any and all phishing sites, by definition. So millions of websites?
- unityByFreedom 6y ago
  Exactly. This "group" is run by one person and an above comment claims it's one of the most reputable tech organizations. I think not since I've never heard of them and I've read tech news daily for the last two decades. I can't think of why someone would try to tell a techie that a certain unknown tech org is reputable unless they were advertising for it.
  - sellyme 6y ago
    > I think not since I've never heard of them and I've read tech news daily for the last two decades. That's weird, because they seem to have quite a lot of coverage in major tech news sites: https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/In_The_Media https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/In_The_Media
  - pfranz 6y ago
    They've been around for over a decade and every time a service shuts down and pulls their content there's always a mention of ArchiveTeam trying to coordinate an archive (negotiating end dates, any limiting or throttling with backup, asking for help). I've used them a bunch of times over the years when I see a thread like this. Just search this forum and you'll see them pop up for things like: imdb forums, coursera courses, soundcloud, tumblr's nsfw content, friendster, google reader archives.
  - vidarh 6y ago
    This just suggests to me you've not paid attention to news reports around big services shutting down, as Archive Team gets brought up regularly in those instances. Nothing wrong with that, and asking the question is fair enough, but doubling down on it in the face of being given references to who they are that are easy to verify gets a bit tiresome. Especially since this is a group prominent enough to have a brief but well cited Wikipedia page [1] with references to media appearances in Wired, The Register, PC World, Technology Review, OnTheMedia, Techdirt, BBC, RadioNZ, CBC, New Scientist and others. You can also find Jason Scott on HN [2], and his comments will point you to a number of other HN threads discussing archival, some of which are relevant to Archive Team. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archive_Team https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archive_Team [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=textfiles https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=textfiles
- patd 6y ago
  https://help.archive.org/hc/en-us/articles/360001513491-Save-Pages-in-the-Wayback-Machine https://help.archive.org/hc/en-us/articles/360001513491-Save... They point to the Archive Team in point 4
- billpg 6y ago
  I wonder why team.archive.org wasn't used.

sellyme 6y ago

Archive Team is probably one of the most reputable organisations on the internet at this point. Being careful is great, but when you yourself linked to a page that provides an extraordinary amount of information explaining exactly who they are and what they're doing (plus the source code to prove it!), it comes across as fearmongering.

unityByFreedom 6y ago
Most reputable? I don't think so. Archive.org and EFF are far more well known. Also, when I wrote this comment, the home page 404'ed for me. Naming yourself after a well known org and adding "team" after it doesn't sit well with me.
- ajayyy 6y ago
  The name "archive" isn't reserved for the Internet Archive. ArchiveTeam is not an organisation, just a group of volunteers.
- sellyme 6y ago
  > Naming yourself after a well known org They're named after the concept of archiving things, as the entire point of the group is to archive things. Archive Team itself is extremely well-known and has been the primary force archiving shut-down websites for over a decade. The 1TB Geocities archive - possibly the most famous website archival project ever - was their work.
- 13rac1 6y ago
  Jason Scott created Archive Team. He works at the Internet Archive (archive.org). Archive Team is a community project kept distinct from his work. * https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/Who_We_Are https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/Who_We_Are > This project is composed of volunteers, currently coordinated by Jason Scott. * https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/User:Jscott https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/User:Jscott * https://twitter.com/textfiles https://twitter.com/textfiles > Proprietor of http://TEXTFILES.COM http://TEXTFILES.COM, historian, filmmaker, archivist, storyteller. Works on/for the Internet Archive. Rank Amateur.

cmeacham98 6y ago

It isn't an extension, it's a VM image. Unless you believe they possess and are publicly distributing an unpatched VM breakout the worst it can do is maliciously use your internet connection.

textfiles 6y ago

oh no he's onto us boys

FriendlyNormie 6y ago
Oh nice, you’re ridiculing someone who is afraid of your sketchy as fuck app and you’re making no attempt to demonstrate that he’s wrong. I definitely trust you now. Dumb faggot