Live data from Hacker News

The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

ft.com

161–170 of 323 posts

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no public-interest benefit in hate screeds. Those are memetic viruses with established body counts and should be studied, if at all, in the manner one studies smallpox.

[flagged]

Agreed. We watched Google slowly change its search algorithms to condition certain information you receive, archive.org is the least problem in the age of "misinformation". Why is Trump mentioned in this article? Level 1 scapegoating right here. This is a vile attack on technology and your personal freedom.

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#162

9/11 in the Archive. Go look at all the news websites on September 10th, 2001... and back about a month or two. All empty until 9/11.

Supposedly a lot of news sites were pummeled with traffic on 9/11, which prompted investment following that.

> Supposedly a lot of news sites were pummeled with traffic on 9/11,

I think it's pretty safe to say that new sites were pummeled with traffic on the biggest news day since the internet was widely used for news.

Certainly, it's the simplest explanation for how news vs. other sites behaved on 9/11.

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

And they would be wrong. Liberation literature is not in the same category as hate screeds. I don't buy the moral abdication you're selling. You know what's evil - it's the stuff full of race hate and misogyny. There is no moral equivalence.

It’s amazing how if you try to make a progressive political point here, you tend to get criticized. But when it comes time to judge the morality of things like racism or misogyny, suddenly it’s impossible to know the morality of any idea ever.

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#164

9/11 in the Archive. Go look at all the news websites on September 10th, 2001... and back about a month or two. All empty until 9/11.

There are many similar gaps in collection in the early years of the Internet Archive.

Early archive.org web captures came overwhelmingly from crawls by the company Alexa Internet (which started in 1995 but by 2001 was a subsiiary of Amazon). Alexa's original bulk web crawling was intermittent: restarted once every couple of months, without much focus on rapid re-crawls of news sites. You can also see seasonal patterns, with larger lulls in summers.

The events of 2001-09-11 prompted a bunch of fresh, faster crawls – and higher prioritization of news website re-crawls.

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#165
post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd rather not have a manual for starting a neo-nazi race war archived to be honest

How about a Communist manifesto or other authoritarian literature? Why are we only really concerned about one type of authoritarian?

[flagged]

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This means I oftentimes find myself looking at the raw numbers of, say, gun deaths or immigration numbers, etc. Data is meaningless without context and context is inevitably political and subject to bias.

Context is data. All you're saying is that data is better when there is additional relevant data. Yes...

Context is often not data, e.g. knowledge of past events, which can be subject to incomplete information or bias (i.e. history is written by the victorious).

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about a Communist manifesto or other authoritarian literature? Why are we only really concerned about one type of authoritarian?

[flagged]

And people completely forget history... there were several popular variants of totalitarian socialism in europe. Russia in particular had civil-war like conflicts between the main 3 factions (iirc, red, green, white) and facism was definitely in the mix, but after WWII fell out and for some weird reason no longer considered socialist.

After WWII, there were definite anti-communist movements, though McCarthyism took things way too far. You cannot combat ideas with censorship, they'll fester.

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about a Communist manifesto or other authoritarian literature? Why are we only really concerned about one type of authoritarian?

[flagged]

> It's currently in-vogue to be scared of and hate nazi's. For some reason though that sentiment never took root against communists.

It did, there was plenty of paranoia and hatred of communists during the Cold War days, we just never fought an actual war against communists (edit: except in Vietnam and Korea, I forgot that for some reason...) Of course, a lot of that Red Scare stuff was just a thin coat of patriotic paint over anti-semitism and anti-gay bigotry, but I digress.

Also, it's not in-vogue to hate Nazis. Everyone other than Nazis has hated Nazis consistently ever since Nazis were a thing.

What is in-vogue, however, is to be a nazi (little n, colloquial meaning, because I know sometimes people like to be pedantic) amongst the American right and alt-right, as the current American President's election has coincided with a revival of right-wing populism and white supremacist identity politics. No, I am not calling Trump a nazi nor am I calling all Trump supporters nazis so they can stop clutching their pearls ... that white supremacists decided to turn the populist movement that brought him into power into a narrative of racial identity and purity has been well documented, and it actually depends little whether Trump has sympathy for them, or is just their dark horse.

And that is why America is currently concerned about nazis (little n) and not communists. Because the nazis (little n) managed to meme a President into office, and the communists did not.

>It's almost like that type of political ideology took root in american institutions thus paving the way for this new narrative to take hold that communism is good and facism is bad.

There is no such "new narrative." Communism has never been trusted in the US, and fascism has always been "bad."

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#169
post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Banning Nazi content is easily the most obvious way to create real Nazis amongst the youth, who being young are attracted to anything taboo, or who may believe that there's some big conspiracy to cover something up so "it must be true, they don't want us to know". This is a dark line of thinking.

Ahh yes, of course, the large monolithic monoculture called "the youth" is naturally stupid enough to be "attracted to anything taboo" without thinking or questioning it. That's why they sure are attracted to other taboo things like incest and necrophilia. No. Banning Nazi content won't suddenly make it appealing to young people. Things are a lot more nuanced than "banning bad, because kids dumb".

Political ideology is NOT like incest and necrophilia at all. It is our history and needs preservation.

I never said kids were dumb, but they absolutely are curious, and forbidden knowledge is an incredible lure. The absolute majority will realise it's messed up, but there will always be that few who become radicalised from what they see.

Rather than burying our past we should and need to teach them why it's wrong. This trend of rewriting history is extremely worrisome.

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#170
post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Banning Nazi content is easily the most obvious way to create real Nazis amongst the youth, who being young are attracted to anything taboo, or who may believe that there's some big conspiracy to cover something up so "it must be true, they don't want us to know". This is a dark line of thinking.

Ahh yes, of course, the large monolithic monoculture called "the youth" is naturally stupid enough to be "attracted to anything taboo" without thinking or questioning it. That's why they sure are attracted to other taboo things like incest and necrophilia. No. Banning Nazi content won't suddenly make it appealing to young people. Things are a lot more nuanced than "banning bad, because kids dumb".

Weird how you argue that people aren't stupid enough to fall for nazi bullshit, yet you still didn't argue against banning it.

So which is it? Are people capable of making rational decisions or do people need to be protected by those with the (current) correct ideology?

Post reply on HN