4 ms·

> Not to mention, that historically speaking, you cannot trust google to keep this information preserved, or public. Look at what happened to any number of othe

by yohui 11y ago

> Not to mention, that historically speaking, you cannot trust google to keep this information preserved, or public. Look at what happened to any number of other tools google once offered. Google is hardly going to abandon cloud storage anytime soon. Google's willingness to release and kill small projects has no rational impact on the reliability of their core services. Historically speaking, Google helped preserve Usenet archives via Google Groups and digitized library archives via Google Books. Both projects have seen their share of ups and downs, but they're still publicly available.

leni536 11y ago
> Google is hardly going to abandon cloud storage anytime soon. I wonder what "soon" means in this context. If I wanted to archive anything I would think in the timescale of decades, and that's only for my personal photos and videos.
DanBC 11y ago
It's odd that you'd use the deja news archive. They way Google handled that aas pretty terrible. Arguably moving away from the Google Groups search page and into the general search page but using the site:groups.google.com term is better but now it's really hard to find stuff and it's really hard to search by different parameters.
- yohui 11y ago
  Yes, and Google Books was hampered by backlash from authors. That's why I noted both projects had a history of ups and downs. However, both are still going. The point is that, if we're talking about Google's history, they have shown an interest in preserving data. And in regards to the Internet Archive, they'd only be serving as a backup storage provider, not in a frontend role. This is not to say that Google (or Amazon or Microsoft) should be the only backup provider for the Internet Archive, for example, but it would hardly be a bad thing, as tracker1 suggested, if they cared to donate the resources.

4 ms·

> Not to mention, that historically speaking, you cannot trust google to keep this information preserved, or public. Look at what happened to any number of othe

by yohui 11y ago

leni536 11y ago
> Google is hardly going to abandon cloud storage anytime soon. I wonder what "soon" means in this context. If I wanted to archive anything I would think in the timescale of decades, and that's only for my personal photos and videos.
DanBC 11y ago
It's odd that you'd use the deja news archive. They way Google handled that aas pretty terrible. Arguably moving away from the Google Groups search page and into the general search page but using the site:groups.google.com term is better but now it's really hard to find stuff and it's really hard to search by different parameters.
- yohui 11y ago
  Yes, and Google Books was hampered by backlash from authors. That's why I noted both projects had a history of ups and downs. However, both are still going. The point is that, if we're talking about Google's history, they have shown an interest in preserving data. And in regards to the Internet Archive, they'd only be serving as a backup storage provider, not in a frontend role. This is not to say that Google (or Amazon or Microsoft) should be the only backup provider for the Internet Archive, for example, but it would hardly be a bad thing, as tracker1 suggested, if they cared to donate the resources.