3 ms·

What about internet archive, then?

by kghose 12y ago

axanoeychron 12y ago
Good question. While the right to forget is socially beneficial for society, there are technical problems that make it inconvenient. There is the problem of whether it is censorship to force a neutral party whose mandate is merely to store historical copies of data to remove it. Or is it Google's responsibility to just 'forget' that the copy exists in the web archive? Do defaced websites get indexed by the internet archive? Does illegal information get removed from the internet archive?
- abruzzi 12y ago
  What exactly is "illegal information"? In the US for the most part, we have a distinction between the information and how it was obtained. Daniel Ellsberg may have done something illegal when he released the Pentagon Papers, but once it was in the hands of journalists, the US could not stop its publication. I also disagree that the "right to forget" is socially beneficial. It may benefit individuals who have negative thing about them that they want expunged, but for society as a whole, we are the worse off because if everyone can have their image cleaned of their past, predators and destructive people will have an easier time hiding and preying on others.
happyscrappy 12y ago
Blocked for Europeans. They sure as hell can't afford to do backflips through hoops for this.
dllthomas 12y ago
I think there's a subtle difference as well between a search engine (which mostly turns up recent and relevant) and an archive, in terms of the expectations that searchers have. I don't know that this difference is significant enough to change anything here, but...
smsm42 12y ago
Archives are the most dangerous thing. Definitely nobody in Europe should be allowed there. God knows what forgotten terrors can be hidden there. Free information is dangerous and unpredictable. I'm sure unlicensed information retention will be a crime in EU very soon, if it isn't already. Of course, if you work for the government, it's different - then information retention would be mandatory. Just in case, you know, they suspect you being a terrorist or disclosing some facts about your government they don't want people to hear or something like that.

What about internet archive, then?

by kghose 12y ago

What about internet archive, then?

Good question. While the right to forget is socially beneficial for society, there are technical problems that make it inconvenient. There is the problem of whether it is censorship to force a neutral party whose mandate is merely to store historical copies of data to remove it. Or is it Google's responsibility to just 'forget' that the copy exists in the web archive? Do defaced websites get indexed by the internet archive? Does illegal information get removed from the internet archive?

abruzzi 12y ago
What exactly is "illegal information"? In the US for the most part, we have a distinction between the information and how it was obtained. Daniel Ellsberg may have done something illegal when he released the Pentagon Papers, but once it was in the hands of journalists, the US could not stop its publication. I also disagree that the "right to forget" is socially beneficial. It may benefit individuals who have negative thing about them that they want expunged, but for society as a whole, we are the worse off because if everyone can have their image cleaned of their past, predators and destructive people will have an easier time hiding and preying on others.

happyscrappy 12y ago

Blocked for Europeans. They sure as hell can't afford to do backflips through hoops for this.

dllthomas 12y ago

I think there's a subtle difference as well between a search engine (which mostly turns up recent and relevant) and an archive, in terms of the expectations that searchers have. I don't know that this difference is significant enough to change anything here, but...

smsm42 12y ago

Archives are the most dangerous thing. Definitely nobody in Europe should be allowed there. God knows what forgotten terrors can be hidden there. Free information is dangerous and unpredictable. I'm sure unlicensed information retention will be a crime in EU very soon, if it isn't already. Of course, if you work for the government, it's different - then information retention would be mandatory. Just in case, you know, they suspect you being a terrorist or disclosing some facts about your government they don't want people to hear or something like that.