Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Archiveteam are backing up SoundCloud

archiveteam.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 230 posts

Re: Archiveteam are backing up SoundCloud

#71

Post by nextlevelwizard »

firegrind wrote: post #62
nextlevelwizard wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>By uploading Your Content to the Platform, you also grant a limited, worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, fully paid up, license to other users of the Platform (...) to use, copy, listen to offline, repost, transmit or otherwise distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, adapt, prepare derivative works of, compile, make available and otherwise communicate to the public At least I read this only as "by defaul…

One of the reasons I prefer Soundcloud is that it's trivially easy for me to enable listeners to download tracks for free.

I am sure whatever Archive Team downloads that is determined safe (enough) will end up on Internet Archive for everyone to enjoy. They have all kind of neat stuff there that you might not even think to preserve, like old super market announcements. You can easily spend an evening just rummaging through it if you are into older stuff.

Re: Archiveteam are backing up SoundCloud

#72

Post by roblabla »

snsr wrote: post #61
mmjaa wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as there is a single party interested in content hosted on IPFS, the "IPFS Network" will persist. It would absolutely be the best move for IPFS to be used in this case - maybe something like the AkashaApp guys, albeit for audio-media. Edit: The Akasha App for those who aren't yet familiar with it - https://akasha.world - brings together IPFS and Ethereum to make a truly distributed peer network for persistent…

> As long as there is a single party interested in content hosted on IPFS , the "IPFS Network" will persist. I imagine that's one of the reasons why it's not ideal for archival content.

I don't get why ? It's exactly the same today : you need at least one party to host the data (in this case the archive team). With IPFS however, if more parties wish to host it, it will lighten the load.

Re: Archiveteam are backing up SoundCloud

#73

Post by naasking »

philfrasty wrote: post #48

Just from a legal standpoint: isn't „...considers the SoundCloud service in danger...“ slander? Especially since the Internet Archive isn't a nobody (with maybe some inside information?). Just remembered cases like Deutsche Bank vs Leo Kirch which are legal nightmares.

> Just from a legal standpoint: isn't „...considers the SoundCloud service in danger...“ slander?

I think you mean libel, and I think it's a reasonable conclusion that everyone is thinking given that SoundCloud just laid off so many people.

Re: Archiveteam are backing up SoundCloud

#74

Post by icebraining »

DanBC wrote: post #59
Bromskloss wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never thought about the medium thing. If you write a song (and perhaps perform it in public and everything), but never commit it into writing or recording, does copyright not apply?

What would the copyrights apply to if there's no recording?

Live concerts played from memory? E.g. Eubie Blake supposedly only wrote Charleston Rag down 16 years after composing it.

Re: Archiveteam are backing up SoundCloud

#75

Post by nextlevelwizard »

CharlesDodgson wrote: post #56

Does anyone feel that this is all a bit pointless. Like is there a greater social need to preserve SC? I found a lot of the content to ephemeral, things like podcasts or DJ mixes. I dunno, it just seems a bit silly to put resources on it.

Someone might have poured all of their creativity to content on that platform and to loosely quote Jason Scott "this might be the largest audience this specific line of genes have/will ever reach". Is that not worth preserving? Even if it just takes a thumb drive worth of space? Even if the content sucks, it still part of our history as a species. Think of some of the old works/diaries/letters that are now thought to hold value. Like I've been lately reading "letter from Seneca". Why are they any more worthy of preservation than something on SoundCloud?

Re: Archiveteam are backing up SoundCloud

#76

Post by nextlevelwizard »

philfrasty wrote: post #48

Just from a legal standpoint: isn't „...considers the SoundCloud service in danger...“ slander? Especially since the Internet Archive isn't a nobody (with maybe some inside information?). Just remembered cases like Deutsche Bank vs Leo Kirch which are legal nightmares.

Good luck suing not for profit volunteer group when you yourself are in financial trouble to begin with. I'm not saying it's impossible, but there's not much to gain.

Re: Archiveteam are backing up SoundCloud

#78

Post by diggan »

unicornporn wrote: post #42
StavrosK wrote: post #4

Hmm, I've been playing with IPFS lately, and just had an idea: Since IPFS is perfect for archival, Archiveteam could put their files on IPFS, and users could help out by pinning stuff on their local nodes. For example, I could ask their website to give me a 10 GB list of files to pin (if I wanted to "donate" 10 GB to them), and I'd keep them available. The only problem is that I don't know whether IPFS has any way to…

IPFS would not be considered suitable for digital preservation. Have a look at LOCKSS[1]. [1] https://www.lockss.org/

Interested in understanding why you think it's not suitable for digital preservation? Feels like something that uses content-addressing and a P2P network is perfect for digital preservation.

Re: Archiveteam are backing up SoundCloud

#79

Post by SeanDav »

syshum wrote: post #44
evook wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost certainly Google Drive unlimited.

And this is how Google Drive Unlimited becomes Google Drive Limited... Like every other Unlimited service, because people like this abuse the shit out of it then when it inevitably dies they run around exclaiming "dont blame me brah they said it was unlimited...., shouldn't have called it unlimited"

A car company says: "You can have any colour car you want as long as it is black..."

I am sure there will be people defending the car company as really offering unlimited colours, but obviously they have to restrict it to black, because some clients were unreasonable to expect the company to paint their car Neon Vermilion.

Or to put it another way, "You can have unlimited storage, except that it is limited..."

Re: Archiveteam are backing up SoundCloud

#80

Post by c8g »

skeletonjelly wrote: post #6

> Resource Limit Is Reached > The website is temporarily unable to service your request as it exceeded resource limit. Please try again later. I suppose I prefer an archive over the blog being unavailable

>I suppose I prefer an archive over the blog being unavailable

http://web.archive.org/web/20170717083540/http://archiveteam...

it is interesting that their blog is not good enough for archive. link above and below are different (first one is updated but second one is not, because link contains some extra info). they will be able to save a lot of space by finding duplicate.

http://web.archive.org/web/20170606104512/http://archiveteam...

Post reply on HN