14 ms·

Archive.org is such a godsend.- The entire information 'substrate' of society is ephemeral, if digital, and none (at least not enough) seem to have noticed.-

InsideOutSanta 2y ago
I wrote a book in 2010. It had a references section with links to about 100 websites. When I wrote the second edition only about five years later, 50% of those links no longer worked. What we're doing right now is borderline insane. We're putting all of this information on the web, but almost each individual bit of information is dependent on either a company or a human being keeping it online. It's inevitable that companies change their minds, and humans die, so almost all of the information that is online right now will just disappear in the next 80 years. And we essentially only have one single entity that tries to retain that information.
- throwaway48476 2y ago
  That entity goes out of its way to hide information if you're friends with the owners.
  - jazzyjackson 2y ago
    All the more reason not to rely on it, hard to complain when no one else is willing to do what they do
- walterbell 2y ago
  > references section with links to about 100 websites. Books deserve a github repo with PDF web archives of referenced links, the same way that Wikipedia mirrors the content of cited links.
  - ekianjo 2y ago
    certainly not GitHub
    - walterbell 2y ago
      What would you recommend instead?
      - Intralexical 2y ago
        Copyright permitting, big QR code containing the plain text.
  - SirMaster 2y ago
    But wouldn't that be a big waste if everyone who references the same thing is then keeping a copy of it.
    - progbits 2y ago
      Better many copies than none. References usually mean written text and maybe some figures, cost of storage is going down, we can afford the duplication.
    - throwup238 2y ago
      One person’s waste is another person’s resilience.
    - walterbell 2y ago
      > big waste Storage cost has fallen exponentially for decades, https://ourworldindata.org/data-insights/the-price-of-computer-storage-has-fallen-exponentially-since-the-1950s https://ourworldindata.org/data-insights/the-price-of-comput...
    - Bluestein 2y ago
      > everyone who references the same thing is then keeping a copy of it. ... and it would serve as a form of redundancy, imitating the fungible nature of physical media: In order to cite the latest, copied, manuscript (for example) you needed to own a physical copy. They existence of these has enabled survival of works that would otherwise have been lost, or even reconstruction through ecdotics.-
    - JohnFen 2y ago
      Redundancy isn't really a waste.
  - InsideOutSanta 2y ago
    There are all kinds of publisher and legal issues. Trust me, I did my best.
    - walterbell 2y ago
      Could Wikipedia or Archive.org offer references-as-a-service to book publishers for a small fee? They already have the infrastructure and legal cover.
- Bluestein 2y ago
  > so almost all of the information that is online right now will just disappear in the next 80 years. > And we essentially only have one single entity that tries to retain that information. Will future ages find ours a dark age, a gap in their records, a void ... ... up until the point - if ever - where a sufficiently advanced solution for permanence is found and comes online?
  - Intralexical 2y ago
    > ... up until the point - if ever - where a sufficiently advanced solution for permanence is found and comes online? Like the laser printer? The cost of permanent, physical preservation is pennies. People just don't do it for most things. And it doesn't guarantee accessibility, which has hosting costs.
    - Bluestein 2y ago
      > Like the laser printer? Sure. Whatever works.- But I meant one that is systematically and systemically and widely used.-
  - JohnFen 2y ago
    > Will future ages find ours a dark age, a gap in their records, a void I think this is a very likely future, yes.
    - Bluestein 2y ago
      Grim, indeed.-
- Bluestein 2y ago
  > wrote a book in 2010. It had a references section Out of curiosity, may I ask what it was about?
makin 2y ago
Two big issues with Archive.org are that 1. it's a single point of failure, they don't encourage mirror sites to emerge, and 2. they keep using the "brand" to fight unwinnable battles like hosting books they don't own online, risking the whole endeavor. I still appreciate it, but just imagine if it goes down due to a lawsuit. Now that Google no longer shows cached results, an entire historical record would be gone.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- medstrom 2y ago
  https://github.com/internetarchive/dweb-mirror https://github.com/internetarchive/dweb-mirror
  - makin 2y ago
    If you check the issues, you'll learn this is not a supported project anymore (and honestly, it hardly worked even back then).
- Bluestein 2y ago
  > Now that Google no longer shows cached results, That was also the "end of an era" of sorts right there.- > they don't encourage mirror sites to emerge, Something over BitTorrent or blockchain would work well here, methinks. As a baseline substrate.-
- stateofinquiry 2y ago
  Its surprising that archive.org is the only such outfit I have encountered. Just like we have had libraries since ancient times, why are there so few digital libraries? There must be others, but nowhere near the number (or awareness) that we should have. Heck, existing paper-based libraries should probably each include a digital archiving department. Maybe this is already happening or already exists, and is trivial to those studying library science or something. I can hope, anyway.
  - 2y ago

InsideOutSanta 2y ago

I wrote a book in 2010. It had a references section with links to about 100 websites. When I wrote the second edition only about five years later, 50% of those links no longer worked. What we're doing right now is borderline insane. We're putting all of this information on the web, but almost each individual bit of information is dependent on either a company or a human being keeping it online. It's inevitable that companies change their minds, and humans die, so almost all of the information that is online right now will just disappear in the next 80 years. And we essentially only have one single entity that tries to retain that information.

throwaway48476 2y ago
That entity goes out of its way to hide information if you're friends with the owners.
- jazzyjackson 2y ago
  All the more reason not to rely on it, hard to complain when no one else is willing to do what they do
walterbell 2y ago
> references section with links to about 100 websites. Books deserve a github repo with PDF web archives of referenced links, the same way that Wikipedia mirrors the content of cited links.
- ekianjo 2y ago
  certainly not GitHub
  - walterbell 2y ago
    What would you recommend instead?
    - Intralexical 2y ago
      Copyright permitting, big QR code containing the plain text.
- SirMaster 2y ago
  But wouldn't that be a big waste if everyone who references the same thing is then keeping a copy of it.
  - progbits 2y ago
    Better many copies than none. References usually mean written text and maybe some figures, cost of storage is going down, we can afford the duplication.
  - throwup238 2y ago
    One person’s waste is another person’s resilience.
  - walterbell 2y ago
    > big waste Storage cost has fallen exponentially for decades, https://ourworldindata.org/data-insights/the-price-of-computer-storage-has-fallen-exponentially-since-the-1950s https://ourworldindata.org/data-insights/the-price-of-comput...
  - Bluestein 2y ago
    > everyone who references the same thing is then keeping a copy of it. ... and it would serve as a form of redundancy, imitating the fungible nature of physical media: In order to cite the latest, copied, manuscript (for example) you needed to own a physical copy. They existence of these has enabled survival of works that would otherwise have been lost, or even reconstruction through ecdotics.-
  - JohnFen 2y ago
    Redundancy isn't really a waste.
- InsideOutSanta 2y ago
  There are all kinds of publisher and legal issues. Trust me, I did my best.
  - walterbell 2y ago
    Could Wikipedia or Archive.org offer references-as-a-service to book publishers for a small fee? They already have the infrastructure and legal cover.
Bluestein 2y ago
> so almost all of the information that is online right now will just disappear in the next 80 years. > And we essentially only have one single entity that tries to retain that information. Will future ages find ours a dark age, a gap in their records, a void ... ... up until the point - if ever - where a sufficiently advanced solution for permanence is found and comes online?
- Intralexical 2y ago
  > ... up until the point - if ever - where a sufficiently advanced solution for permanence is found and comes online? Like the laser printer? The cost of permanent, physical preservation is pennies. People just don't do it for most things. And it doesn't guarantee accessibility, which has hosting costs.
  - Bluestein 2y ago
    > Like the laser printer? Sure. Whatever works.- But I meant one that is systematically and systemically and widely used.-
- JohnFen 2y ago
  > Will future ages find ours a dark age, a gap in their records, a void I think this is a very likely future, yes.
  - Bluestein 2y ago
    Grim, indeed.-
Bluestein 2y ago
> wrote a book in 2010. It had a references section Out of curiosity, may I ask what it was about?

makin 2y ago

Two big issues with Archive.org are that 1. it's a single point of failure, they don't encourage mirror sites to emerge, and 2. they keep using the "brand" to fight unwinnable battles like hosting books they don't own online, risking the whole endeavor. I still appreciate it, but just imagine if it goes down due to a lawsuit. Now that Google no longer shows cached results, an entire historical record would be gone.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
medstrom 2y ago
https://github.com/internetarchive/dweb-mirror https://github.com/internetarchive/dweb-mirror
- makin 2y ago
  If you check the issues, you'll learn this is not a supported project anymore (and honestly, it hardly worked even back then).
Bluestein 2y ago
> Now that Google no longer shows cached results, That was also the "end of an era" of sorts right there.- > they don't encourage mirror sites to emerge, Something over BitTorrent or blockchain would work well here, methinks. As a baseline substrate.-
stateofinquiry 2y ago
Its surprising that archive.org is the only such outfit I have encountered. Just like we have had libraries since ancient times, why are there so few digital libraries? There must be others, but nowhere near the number (or awareness) that we should have. Heck, existing paper-based libraries should probably each include a digital archiving department. Maybe this is already happening or already exists, and is trivial to those studying library science or something. I can hope, anyway.
- 2y ago