Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a nice little script. function wayback_link(url) { return `https://web.archive.org/web/${url}`; } console.log(wayback_link("https://github.com"))
I just went to https://web.archive.org/web/news.ycombinator.com (no date in the url) and it sent me to the most recent snapshot.
This Place Is Not a Place of Honor (1992)
31–40 of 125 posts
Re: This Place Is Not a Place of Honor (1992)
#32I always imagined a concept such that instead of trying to deter people from entering was designed to convey that it was trying to keep something dangerous from escaping. Someone trying to keep you out of an ancient tomb? Clearly there are valuables in there. An ancient tomb that's locked from the outside? That's creepy.
Re: This Place Is Not a Place of Honor (1992)
#33Re: This Place Is Not a Place of Honor (1992)
#34[1] Amazon link: https://www.amazon.com/Deep-Time-Humanity-Communicates-Mille...
[2] Seems to be online, albeit poorly formatted, here: https://www.physics.uci.edu/~silverma/benford.html
Re: This Place Is Not a Place of Honor (1992)
#35https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Interference_Task_Force
I think their best work has to be the ray-cats.
http://mentalfloss.com/article/27476/ray-cats-artificial-moo...
Re: This Place Is Not a Place of Honor (1992)
#36I feel like there's something to think about here since we couldn't even keep the page with this information active for a decade and the goal is to keep the actual warning around for 10,000 years.
Or, to realize that we did in fact keep it active, just through archive.org, the modern day Library of Alexandria on steroids. EDIT: Makes things hard if the warning sign was a link however, yes. Could just add a published date then, and I'd assume things would be fine.
Re: This Place Is Not a Place of Honor (1992)
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ha! That would make a great story. Mormons already have a hollowed out mountain[1] but at least ostensibly it's full of genealogical records not plutonium. (Also I'm a Mormon.) [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granite_Mountain_(Utah)
Why so much work into storing genealogical records?
Of course, this presumption of religious axioms also has a history of upsetting people of other religions, and the extensive information-gathering involved often uses borderline unethical methods, such as the various geneology research service websites that are run in one way or another by the LDS Church and include terms of service that let them use the info you piece together however they like.
Re: This Place Is Not a Place of Honor (1992)
#38For the curious, 2017: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15210404 2016: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11851871 2011: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2211025 2009: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=948606
We should create something like the olympiad to gather together and re-tell the epic story of danger every few years, rather than building a monument and hoping it still means something on its own.
That way we keep this alive in the public consciences and even if the competition dies out, hopefully at least one work will survive 10,000 years.
Re: This Place Is Not a Place of Honor (1992)
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or, to realize that we did in fact keep it active, just through archive.org, the modern day Library of Alexandria on steroids. EDIT: Makes things hard if the warning sign was a link however, yes. Could just add a published date then, and I'd assume things would be fine.
This is a nice little script. function wayback_link(url) { return `https://web.archive.org/web/${url}`; } console.log(wayback_link("https://github.com"))
You could also do the same with "https://web.archive.org/web/", but "!wayback " is easier for me to remember.
Re: This Place Is Not a Place of Honor (1992)
#40My proposed solution goes something like this: It is hard to convey that there is nothing of value and only danger within. So what if you just made the site actually dangerous on the surface? Is it possible to build something like a lake of acid that would make the area uninhabitable, dangerous, and impossible to develop?
Or, to keep it more abstract: Maybe the problem is that we're looking for the right symbol. But instead of symbols we should make the fact of the area itself the deterrent.