4 ms·
The linked blog contains a story about who funds archive today and they presumably don’t like being exposed.
by nailer 7mo ago
The linked blog contains a story about who funds archive today and they presumably don’t like being exposed.
- throwingcookies 7mo agoThanks. I am so confused by this social drama, I feel like I am getting too old for this.
- ryandrake 7mo agoIt’s truly weird and unhinged the extent to which two rando Internet People are willing to grief each other.
- throwingcookies 7mo agoParasocialweb 2.0 I suppose.
- VERIRoot 7mo agowell that exposing is hurting more than 2 for sure
- JasonADrury 7mo ago[flagged]
- drum55 7mo agoShould providing a public service absolve all sins?
- JasonADrury 7mo agoSo far, the only sin archive.today has been accused of is retaliating against a guy attempting to dox them. That's a pretty small sin in my book. To be written off as wildly unsuccessful but entirely justified self defense. DDoSing gyrovague.com is silly, not evil. The content on gyrovague.com which targets archive.today is evil, plain and simple.
- miken123 7mo ago> So far, the only sin archive.today has been accused of is retaliating against a guy attempting to dox them. I think you're missing that circumventing paywalls is unlawful in most parts of the world.
- Hamuko 7mo agoNot really sure if circumventing paywalls is that unlawful across the world, but basically copying and pasting an entire web page is just clear and simple copyright violation.
- choo-t 7mo ago> I think you're missing that circumventing paywalls is unlawful in most parts of the world. And a necessity if you want to archive the content correctly, also necessary if you want the archives to be publicly available.
- animuchan 7mo agoRespectfully, it's not, in most parts of the world.
- Permik 7mo agoarchive.today has a documented history of altering the archived content, as such they immediately lose the veil of protection of a service of "public good" in my books. Just my 2 ¢, not that it really matters anymore in this current information-warfare climate and polarization. :/
- baal80spam 7mo ago> archive.today has a documented history of altering the archived content Wow, I had no idea. Thanks.
- JasonADrury 7mo agoArchive.org has an even worse history of this, FWIW. It allows website owners and third parties to tamper with archived content. Look here, for example: https://web.archive.org/web/20140701040026/http://echo.msk.ru/ https://web.archive.org/web/20140701040026/http://echo.msk.r... Archive.today is by far the best option available.
- kuschkufan 7mo ago[flagged]
- vachina 7mo agoI know it's petty. But don't act surprised when you find your garbage strewn all over your lawn next morning after you flipped off your neighbor the fourth time.
- nailer 7mo agoArchive today being free doesn’t excuse them using their audience to DDoS someone they don’t like or excuse them from modifying archive content. Also documenting who funds a service is in the public interest.
- JasonADrury 7mo ago>Also documenting who funds a service is in the public interest. Not really, no. It's not unlikely to result in the service ceasing to exist.
- vanchor3 7mo ago> The crucial context here is that archive.today provides a useful public service for free. So public services should DDoS is your argument? > Jani Patokallio runs gyrovague.net in order to harass people who provide useful public services. I scrolled pretty far through the blog and didn't find anything of that sort. Just a bunch of travel stuff. Now I'm curious what sort of "harassment" you hallucinated in the sites that were previously targeted by archive.today's DDoS attacks.
- _osud 7mo ago[flagged]
- ricardobeat 7mo agoBesides the article about archive.today, which doesn't expose much, I see one about Clash of Clans, and a random crypto product. Those are not 'public services', not sure how you can put these in the same bundle?
- Lazare 7mo ago> Jani Patokallio runs gyrovague.net in order to harass people who provide useful public services. I mean...investigating who runs secretive yet popular websites is a useful public service, generally called "journalism". And your comments in this thread could be seen as an attempt to harass Jani. I do not, to be clear, think you're doing anything morally wrong, but I'm also not sure I see how you can draw a bright line between your actions and Jani's. By the rather stretched logic and loose standards you've been using in these comments, it seems like you run your HN account to harass people who provide useful public services, no?
- _osud 7mo agoI don't think your logic stands up to the most basic analysis: It's unarguably easy to demonstrate the public benefit generated by archive.today, we use the links here on HN to bypass paywalls every single day. Please demonstrate any public benefit generated by gyrovagues blog post.
- steveharing1 7mo agoYou mean just to keep their secrets hidden they hurt others?
- choo-t 7mo agoLike most companies or state ? As an individual, keeping their identity private is the only way to prevent oppression.