3 ms·

It's not just for paywall bypassing. Sometimes there are archive.today snapshots that aren't in the Wayback Machine (though I think your overall point about law

by Brybry 9mo ago

It's not just for paywall bypassing. Sometimes there are archive.today snapshots that aren't in the Wayback Machine (though I think your overall point about lawlessness still stands). For example, there was some NASA debris that hit a guy's house in Florida and it was in the news. [1] Some news sites linked to a Twitter post he made with the images but he later deleted the post. [2] The Wayback Machine has a ton of snapshots of the Twitter post but none of them render for me. [3] But archive.today's snapshot works great. [4] [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9www02e49zo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9www02e49zo [2] https://xcancel.com/Alejandro0tero/status/1768729031493427225 https://xcancel.com/Alejandro0tero/status/176872903149342722... [3] https://web.archive.org/web/20240715000000*/https://twitter.com/Alejandro0tero/status/1768729031493427225 https://web.archive.org/web/20240715000000*/https://twitter.... [4] https://archive.md/obuWr https://archive.md/obuWr

internetter 9mo ago
Archive.today has a different approach to the baseline archive technology (executing javascript at archival time and saving the DOM instead of saving and replaying server responses verbatim). Additionally, Archive.today employs a number of site specific mitigations which aren't visible to the end user. In some cases, for instance, they use accounts, but then retroactively modify the DOM to mask this mitigation. [0] While the exact strategy they use for Twitter isn't known to me, they are doing something by their own admission. [1] [0] https://blog.archive.today/post/708008224368001024/why-isnt-instagram-archive-working https://blog.archive.today/post/708008224368001024/why-isnt-... compounded with personal observation. [1] https://blog.archive.today/post/708565142782246912/pretty-please-remove-the-recent-restrictions-for https://blog.archive.today/post/708565142782246912/pretty-pl...
1vuio0pswjnm7 9mo ago
. { echo resolve web.archive.org:443:207.241.237.3 echo url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240404223104if_/https://twitter.com/Alejandro0tero/status/1768729031493427225 echo user-agent=\"\" echo header accept: } \ |curl -qK/dev/stdin|tr \< '\n'|sed -n '/^meta/s/^/</;/./{/og:url/,/og:image/p;}'

by Brybry 9mo ago

internetter 9mo ago

Archive.today has a different approach to the baseline archive technology (executing javascript at archival time and saving the DOM instead of saving and replaying server responses verbatim). Additionally, Archive.today employs a number of site specific mitigations which aren't visible to the end user. In some cases, for instance, they use accounts, but then retroactively modify the DOM to mask this mitigation. [0] While the exact strategy they use for Twitter isn't known to me, they are doing something by their own admission. [1] [0] https://blog.archive.today/post/708008224368001024/why-isnt-instagram-archive-working https://blog.archive.today/post/708008224368001024/why-isnt-... compounded with personal observation. [1] https://blog.archive.today/post/708565142782246912/pretty-please-remove-the-recent-restrictions-for https://blog.archive.today/post/708565142782246912/pretty-pl...

1vuio0pswjnm7 9mo ago

. { echo resolve web.archive.org:443:207.241.237.3 echo url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240404223104if_/https://twitter.com/Alejandro0tero/status/1768729031493427225 echo user-agent=\"\" echo header accept: } \ |curl -qK/dev/stdin|tr \< '\n'|sed -n '/^meta/s/^/</;/./{/og:url/,/og:image/p;}'