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

The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 323 posts

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#91

Post by foota »

Rebelgecko wrote: post #52
ineedasername wrote: post #34

I like that the internet archive exists, but I don't like how they implement their opt-out policy. Sites can opt-out at any time, which I suppose is the correct thing to allow, but once they opt out then everything the Archive has gathered up to that point also goes away, which seems wrong.

I got frustrated with this one time when I tried to look up a defunct website in the Wayback Machine. The website was gone, but had been replaced by a domain squatter with a restrictive robots.txt. Because of the new roboots.txt, all of the old site was retroactively made unavailable. As time passes and more websites change hands, it would be a nice compromise if the default behavior was only to make retroactive dele…

Would be cool if this could be tied to SSL keys. Being able to serve requests with the same SSL key could be used as verification. (obviously some edge cases like people that are behind some kind of common SSL cert like a subdomain with shared hosting)

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#92

Post by pgeorgi »

ineedasername wrote: post #48
toomuchtodo wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn’t go away, it’s just not public. This is to comply with copyright law. It’s still safely stored on disk.

Okay, if they have no choice in it then I understand. But as for keeping a copy on disk that practically no one can ever see, to me that strikes seems like a distinction without a difference.

"No one" in the next ~70-90 years.

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#93

Post by blackflame7000 »

mjevans wrote: post #83
ineedasername wrote: post #34

I like that the internet archive exists, but I don't like how they implement their opt-out policy. Sites can opt-out at any time, which I suppose is the correct thing to allow, but once they opt out then everything the Archive has gathered up to that point also goes away, which seems wrong.

I believe that policy to be morally wrong. If a site WAS accessible then that old version should continue to be until an active legal tool is used to request the offline archiving rather than free access as it was at the time of observation.

Yea but I can't just copy a website and start hosting my own version for numerous copyright reasons even if it is just to archive. I can't for example torrent a bunch of movies and store them for the purpose of "archiving"

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#96

Post by ravenstine »

Archiving the web is a fine thing on its own, but why must everything become a "war" against misinformation, fake news, etc.? It can simply be a side benefit to having the Internet Archive. But I'm wary of anyone who claims to be trying to combat misinformation, because usually there's a political agenda. (and I don't care whose agenda it is, but by all means, downvote me...)

I don't want the Internet Archive to be around for the sake of keeping tabs on Trump or pointing out fake news. Just archive web content. The end, please.

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#97

Post by ticmasta »

blackflame7000 wrote: post #93
mjevans wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe that policy to be morally wrong. If a site WAS accessible then that old version should continue to be until an active legal tool is used to request the offline archiving rather than free access as it was at the time of observation.

Yea but I can't just copy a website and start hosting my own version for numerous copyright reasons even if it is just to archive. I can't for example torrent a bunch of movies and store them for the purpose of "archiving"

Actually, a library is a specific legal context that does allow it to do many things similar to what you're describing. It can't steal movies for archiving, but it certainly can purchase and share legally procured copies. Digital sharing is an admittedly more complex minefield...

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#98

Post by cmroanirgo »

gwern wrote: post #6
haunter wrote: post #2

Does anyone how the Internet Archive get a bypass on DMCA? It's full of pirated games for example. I'm aware that it's one thing to archive something but anyone can download it as well, so it's essentially distribution too. Just curious how does it work. Personally that's how I get old SNES, NES, DS games.

The IA actually has a DMCA exemption for the pirated games: https://archive.org/about/dmca.php

> to be valid until the next Copyright Office rulemaking in 2006

It seems that the ruling might be a few years out of date?

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#99

Post by efa »

SamBam wrote: post #9
taborj wrote: post #5

They mention archiving a bunch of Trump stuff, but are they just focusing on conservatives? There's a bunch of misinformation on both sides, and if they're really after the truth, they should be paying the same amount of time and attention to both right and left. Somewhat related: it's sad but perhaps not inevitable that everyone basically has to do their own research to find out what's actually going on. These days,…

What gives you the impression that they're "focusing on conservatives?" Do you have evidence for this statement? You mention archiving Trump's tweets. Do you think that they might do this because he is the President of the United States?

"...the archive began several new projects. One of these was the Trump Archive..." Specifically having a project for just Trump. Do they have one for whoever is the current president?

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#100

Post by TomMckenny »

afiori wrote: post #80
TomMckenny wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> These days, I don't trust... The goal of the new style autocrats and their advocates is not a particular propaganda line but to create doubt in reality based information sources. Individuals can follow rabbit holes until the find the story that matches their previously held world view and so guarantee supporters never defect. For example, you can always find an obscure website "proving" climate change is a hoax. If…

> For example, you can always find an obscure website "proving" climate change is a hoax. But according to the assumption then you check their own sources and their validity. Also while the "climate change is an hoax" is little more than a conspiracy theory in terms of validity, some prediction have been proven false. All together climate change is an undeniable truth, singularly each prediction is far from undeniabl…

That main witness "bombshell" is not remotely what is written in the NYT. It is what Fox news _says_ the NYT wrote knowing the audience will never actually read the article. And is in fact a rather blatant example of undermining reality based media as an "enemy of the people"

>Considering the frequency of retraction

What, even approximately, is the rate of retraction?

And more generally, note the irony that if honest journals correct errors, it is portrayed as proof of conspiracy yet those outlets that don't (or "double down") are considered reliable. Perhaps the NYT should follow politicians and the lower grade media and aggressively deny anything that makes them look bad.

Post reply on HN