Who's paying?
I click through to a few links and cannot find who is doing the matching
That’s what I want to know before committing too.
Keep Our Servers Running
31–40 of 287 posts
Re: Keep Our Servers Running
#32I like the theory of the IA enough that I have a reoccurring donation, but I've thought a few times about e-mailing them to cancel (they have to halt your monthly donation charges manually). There's plenty of things I can overlook, like having to compete with scrapers to get a single page to load, or a myriad of longstanding technical issues (my favorite being that the collection upload system silently and irrevocably leaks your e-mail address: https://archive.org/post/240444/help-to-hide-email (2009)). What's a lot harder to overlook is that the IA brazenly hosts warez on clearnet and pulls off stunts like the COVID "emergency library".
I'm all for ending copyright, but does any of that really need to be linked with the Wayback Machine? Huge chunks of the Web have been displaced or snuffed by social media and gen AI, making Wayback a unique(ly valuable) source of information and history. It's not my call, but it seems strange to risk it as a motte for the bailey of copyright abolition activism. What happens when some stick-up-the-ass company—whose stuff is probably in hundreds of different collections—decides it really wants a payday?
Re: Keep Our Servers Running
#33Who's paying?
Let's be honest, almost nobody is donating a significant amount i.e. $100K+ to the Internet Archive that would actually keep them alive. Everyone wants to scrape and extract from them 100% for free.
No. The question OP ask was.... who is paying for the matching?
The donation got 3x, sure somebody is paying, right?
I was planning to donate, and this omission stopped me.
Re: Keep Our Servers Running
#34THere's also archive.today who does great user-directed archiving. We don't appreciate this infrastructure some random guy runs enough. It's annoying how often archive.org blocks sites but they both complement each other very well. https://liberapay.com/archiveis/donate https://coindrop.to/archive When finding archive.today's Monero donation address just now, I had to use archive.org because donatemonero.org [1] is d…
Um. You mean the same site that uses its captcha page to DDOS sites the owner doesn't agree with, and was banned from use on Wikipedia because the owner was modifying the archived pages? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archive.today#2026_attack_on_G... I don't think we should be supporting this random guy, no.
> to DDOS sites the owner doesn't agree with
to DDOS one website, which is doxxing the owner. Not that it makes it good idea, but it's a little more understandable.
Re: Keep Our Servers Running
#35Internet Archive feels like an important... well, archive, yet I often worry about the load, financial and potentially political, which is put on it when people use it as a workaround for pay-walls, as is often advocated on HN
Re: Keep Our Servers Running
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are independent organizations with separate funding.
then why did the main IA account post about this https://mastodon.archive.org/@internetarchive/11721950124572... and it's darkly funny how HN downvotes this when every single answer on Mastodon is incredibly negative
It's not funny at all, it's deeply alarming. I'm in the wrong bar.
Re: Keep Our Servers Running
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well then another guy should provide a technically equivalent and morally superior service ;)
I mean, lots of other archive.* sites exist and do the same thing minus problematic behavior, such as archive.is, archive.oh (though maybe some are operated by the same individual...)
Wikipedia links these as the mirrors.
archive.today
archive.fo
archive.is
archive.li
archive.md
archive.ph
archive.vn
archiveiya74codqgiixo33q62qlrqtkgmcitqx5u2oeqnmn5bpcbiyd.onion
Re: Keep Our Servers Running
#38"Keep running" is interesting phrasing, given that wayback has been serving me nothing but some mix of timeouts, 429 errors, and "Temporarily Offline" messages for weeks.
Re: Keep Our Servers Running
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are independent organizations with separate funding.
then why did the main IA account post about this https://mastodon.archive.org/@internetarchive/11721950124572... and it's darkly funny how HN downvotes this when every single answer on Mastodon is incredibly negative
> and it's darkly funny how HN downvotes this when every single answer on Mastodon is incredibly negative
Mastodon is full of, for the lack of a better word, nuts. Every time I've had the displeasurable experience of clinking a link and seeing that dark violet colour cover my screen I know I'm in for either adults who never matured past their early teenage years or ideological hyperpartisanism, and within five seconds my prejudices are confirmed. Social media doesn't magically fill with rational people the moment you "fix" the infrastructure.
Re: Keep Our Servers Running
#40I still don't get how copying copyrighted content to your own website and then asking for donations can be a legal business model. Nor how it can be morally justified.
I get that many people like such an archive to be around for consumption. Me too. But, keeping emotions aside, I can't find a justification to violate the rights of creators.
I'm sure many people here will have the knee-jerk reaction to immediately downvote this question. But I know there are also thoughtful people on HN. If some of you have ideas about the legal and moral justification for archive.org's actions, I would like to hear them.