3 ms·
Correct:Also, archive.* has actively edited archived sites to promote their agenda. Why folks continue to use them confuses me. One would think the big wikipedi
by eek2121 18d ago
Correct:Also, archive.* has actively edited archived sites to promote their agenda. Why folks continue to use them confuses me. One would think the big wikipedia purge would curb such behavior.
- DaSHacka 18d agoIronically, your framing of the situation is infinitely more disingenuous to push a personal agenda versus anything the archive.today guy did.
- normie3000 18d ago> Why folks continue to use them confuses me. I use them. I haven't ever heard mention that the content is edited. Do you have a source?
- uqers 18d agoSee https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/02/wikipedia-might-blacklist-archive-today-after-site-maintainer-ddosed-a-blog/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/02/wikipedia-might-... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Archive.today_guidance#Why_are_we_doing_this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Archive.today_guidan...? Besides tampering with content, the site was also using visitors to DDOS a blog that mentioned the owner of archive.today.
- sam_lowry_ 18d ago[dead]
- Mogzol 18d agoSee the "Background" section of the Wikipedia RFC on banning archive.today links: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Archive.is_RFC_5 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment... They bulk replaced one string (a name) with another one across many archived pages, and added malicious code to all archive pages that would rapidly send requests to gyrovague.com in an attempt to DDOS them.
- sam345 18d agoJust out of curiosity, how do we know that what is in the Wikipedia comments is accurate? I have no skin in the game. I was just wondering. Anybody can post anything on Wikipedia comments. I find it odd that Ars Technica would use that as a source. Maybe it's fine for gossip and speculation but it shouldn't be in Ars Technica then.
- fc417fc802 18d agoBecause a lot of us watched the drama unfold in real time.
- avadodin 18d agoWe have always been at war with Eastasia.
- Mogzol 18d agoThere is a megalodon.jp archive of an archive.today page that shows the edits: https://megalodon.jp/2026-0219-1654-07/https://archive.ph:443/LZymb https://megalodon.jp/2026-0219-1654-07/https://archive.ph:44... There's also a bunch of previous hackernews discussions about it: - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47474255 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47474255 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46624740 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46624740 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47092006 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47092006 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46843805 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46843805 And you obviously have no reason to believe me, but I was following this when it was happening at the start of this year and can confirm that the DDoS script and archive text replacements really did happen.
- fn-mote 18d ago> Why folks continue to use them confuses me. Seems like the “confused” is disingenuous when not paying for content you read is a clear motivation.
- opello 18d agoConvenience as a higher order motivator than disgust at the bad behavior of archive.{today,ph,...} mentioned elsewhere, I think is the point of the comment to which you replied.
- IAmBroom 17d agoConvenience is by definition one step. Disgust requires research, analysis, and decision. The research alone is beyond most users' general practice. Why would anyone walk in the front door when they could hop a fence, pry open a window, and crawl in?
- thereforegrin 17d agodisgust is the simplest of emotions and so requires none of what you claim. You're mistaking it with substantiated criticism.
- Meneth 17d ago> Why folks continue to use them Because there's no working alternative.
- gpvos 17d agounwall.app works for at least some sites.