3 ms·

I would be suprised if archive.today had something that was not in the wayback machine

by that_lurker 7mo ago

ribosometronome 7mo ago
Accounts to bypass paywalls? The audacity to do it?
- that_lurker 7mo ago
  Oh yeah those where a thing. As a public organization they can't really do that. I personally just don't use websites that paywall important information.
bombcar 7mo ago
Wayback machine removes archives upon request, so there’s definitely stuff they don’t make publicly available (they may still have it).
- super256 7mo ago
  You don't even need to do requests if you are the owner of the URL. Robot.txt changes are applied in retrospect, which means you can disallow crawls to /abc, request a re-crawl, and all snapshots from the past which match this new rule will be removed.
chrisjj 7mo ago
Archive.today has just about everything the archived site doesn't want archived. Archive.org doesn't, because it lets sites delete archives.
zahlman 7mo ago
Trying to search the Wayback machine almost always gives me their made-up 498 error, and when I do get a result the interface for scrolling through dates is janky at best.
layman51 7mo ago
I know that sometimes the behavior of each archiver service is a bit different. For example, it's possible that both Archive.today and the Internet Archive say they have a copy of a page, but then when you open up the IA version, you might see that it renders completely differently or not at all. It might be caused because the webpage has like two scrollbars, or maybe there's a redirect that happens when a link to the page is loaded. I notice this seems to happen on documentation pages that are hosted by Salesforce. It can be a bit of a pain if you want to save to save a backup copy online of a release note or something like that for everyone to easily reference in the future.
- chrisjj 7mo ago
  > it's possible that both Archive.today and the Internet Archive say they have a copy of a page, but then when you open up the IA version, you might see that it renders completely differently or not at all AT archives the page as seen, even including a screenshot. IA archives the page as loaded, then when you view hamfistedly injects its header bar and executes the source JS. As you'd expect the result is often wrecked - or tampered.

I would be suprised if archive.today had something that was not in the wayback machine

ribosometronome 7mo ago

Accounts to bypass paywalls? The audacity to do it?

that_lurker 7mo ago
Oh yeah those where a thing. As a public organization they can't really do that. I personally just don't use websites that paywall important information.

bombcar 7mo ago

Wayback machine removes archives upon request, so there’s definitely stuff they don’t make publicly available (they may still have it).

super256 7mo ago
You don't even need to do requests if you are the owner of the URL. Robot.txt changes are applied in retrospect, which means you can disallow crawls to /abc, request a re-crawl, and all snapshots from the past which match this new rule will be removed.

chrisjj 7mo ago

Archive.today has just about everything the archived site doesn't want archived. Archive.org doesn't, because it lets sites delete archives.

zahlman 7mo ago

Trying to search the Wayback machine almost always gives me their made-up 498 error, and when I do get a result the interface for scrolling through dates is janky at best.

layman51 7mo ago

I know that sometimes the behavior of each archiver service is a bit different. For example, it's possible that both Archive.today and the Internet Archive say they have a copy of a page, but then when you open up the IA version, you might see that it renders completely differently or not at all. It might be caused because the webpage has like two scrollbars, or maybe there's a redirect that happens when a link to the page is loaded. I notice this seems to happen on documentation pages that are hosted by Salesforce. It can be a bit of a pain if you want to save to save a backup copy online of a release note or something like that for everyone to easily reference in the future.

chrisjj 7mo ago
> it's possible that both Archive.today and the Internet Archive say they have a copy of a page, but then when you open up the IA version, you might see that it renders completely differently or not at all AT archives the page as seen, even including a screenshot. IA archives the page as loaded, then when you view hamfistedly injects its header bar and executes the source JS. As you'd expect the result is often wrecked - or tampered.