4 ms·
They have posted twice in four years. Once doing some digging into who runs archive today, and a second time to respond to a ddos attack. Writing about being d
by ahhhhnoooo 7mo ago
They have posted twice in four years. Once doing some digging into who runs archive today, and a second time to respond to a ddos attack.
Writing about being ddos'd seems eminently reasonable. So if you elide that, you are talking about a single article in four years.
It's genuinely nothing.
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- JasonADrury 7mo agoThe purpose of a thing is what it does.
- throwingcookies 7mo ago> The purpose of a thing is what it does. What is the purpose of the DDoS JS in the archive website then? Not DDoS?
- JasonADrury 7mo agoI'm sure it's DDoS, just like the purpose of gyrovague.com is to attack archive.today Easy stuff, no?
- ahhhhnoooo 7mo agoAttack? Did we read the same one article? One article is clearly defensive. The other is a piece of investigative journalism about who and how the site is run. Neither of those is an attack.
- JasonADrury 7mo agoOf course attempting to dox someone is an attack.
- throwingcookies 7mo ago> Of course attempting to dox someone is an attack. That's not how the judicative system works.
- ahhhhnoooo 7mo agoThat might be true! But I don't think anyone in this story did that.