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

Aren't you glad you didn't cite this webpage?

ssnat.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 98 posts

Re: Aren't you glad you didn't cite this webpage?

#51

Post by jlgreco »

VMG wrote: post #50
ynniv wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that your shortener service won't last as long as your print issues either. With the original URL there's still the hope that the Wayback Machine is still maintained and had visited the page. It's a hard problem.

They could simply list the expanded links on the last page of the magazine.

Exactly, or even just issue a yearly book containing the entire mapping. That would save printing since most people probably don't currently care about the expanded form, though in the future they would still be able to look it up in the library system. (They could also start doing this now, while they can't just retroactively add the expanded forms to editions they have already printed.)

Re: Aren't you glad you didn't cite this webpage?

#52

Post by VMG »

ctdonath wrote: post #12
bcoates wrote: post #8

I'm more worried that the Justice Alito is apparently unaware of the phenomenon of vaporware: There are games in which a player can take on the identity and reenact the killings carried out by the perpetrators of the murders at Columbine High School and Virginia Tech. But both the news article and the now defunct website he cites clearly state that the game doesn't exist. http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/04/20/school-sh…

There was at least one (probably more) paltry DOOM map mods depicting Columbine High School. Not finished products, very poorly done, but enough to fulfill Alito's claim. In the spirit of the reference, there was a high-quality simulation of the JFK assassination, with the user acting as Oswald. Made a big splash of outrage in the news and was soon pulled (the contest to reenact "the shot" didn't help). It's still av…

One of the columbine shooters himself has made custom Doom maps: http://doom.wikia.com/wiki/Columbine_High_School_massacre

Re: Aren't you glad you didn't cite this webpage?

#53

Post by j_s »

dublinben wrote: post #41
jaysonelliot wrote: post #30

I publish a print magazine. Up to this point, we've avoided printing URLs in the magazine, because our printed issues may last longer than the links will stay live. To solve the problem, we're launching our own link shortener this month, and printing our own shortened links in the magazine. That way we can control what happens when link rot sets in, whether redirecting or caching content on our own servers if necessa…

I suggest you take a look at the perma.cc initative. There's no reason to reinvent the robust shortlink, and you won't be obligated to run this system forever.

Perma.cc appears to be targeted at links in published journals:

After the paper has been submitted to a journal, the journal staff checks that the provided Perma.cc link actually represents the cited material. If it does, the staff “vests” the link and it is forever preserved. Links that are not “vested” will be preserved for two years, at which point the author will have the option to renew the link for another two years.

Re: Aren't you glad you didn't cite this webpage?

#54

Post by jlgreco »

dublinben wrote: post #41
jaysonelliot wrote: post #30

I publish a print magazine. Up to this point, we've avoided printing URLs in the magazine, because our printed issues may last longer than the links will stay live. To solve the problem, we're launching our own link shortener this month, and printing our own shortened links in the magazine. That way we can control what happens when link rot sets in, whether redirecting or caching content on our own servers if necessa…

I suggest you take a look at the perma.cc initative. There's no reason to reinvent the robust shortlink, and you won't be obligated to run this system forever.

"Once a link is vested, it will never be deleted unless we receive a legitimate legal order to take it down."

That seems odd to me. Could they simply publish their mappings periodically to avoid being able to fully comply with takedowns?

I mean, the article using the link is already published, what legitimate reason could there ever be to destroy a link in it? What would these people issuing the hypothetical takedown do if the author of the paper had just included the link itself?

Re: Aren't you glad you didn't cite this webpage?

#55

Post by telephonetemp »

VMG wrote: post #50
ynniv wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that your shortener service won't last as long as your print issues either. With the original URL there's still the hope that the Wayback Machine is still maintained and had visited the page. It's a hard problem.

They could simply list the expanded links on the last page of the magazine.

Does any existing publication do this? Because providing both shortened and full URLs like this sounds like a great (i.e., retrospectively obvious) way to achieve a balance between "UX" of the magazine and longevity.

Re: Aren't you glad you didn't cite this webpage?

#56

Post by [deleted] »

VMG wrote: post #50
ynniv wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that your shortener service won't last as long as your print issues either. With the original URL there's still the hope that the Wayback Machine is still maintained and had visited the page. It's a hard problem.

They could simply list the expanded links on the last page of the magazine.

[deleted]

Re: Aren't you glad you didn't cite this webpage?

#57

Post by ynniv »

VMG wrote: post #50
ynniv wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that your shortener service won't last as long as your print issues either. With the original URL there's still the hope that the Wayback Machine is still maintained and had visited the page. It's a hard problem.

They could simply list the expanded links on the last page of the magazine.

I think this is a great idea. The casual reader will type in the short url (giving the publisher tracking and control), but the expansion will be available long as the print issue survives. This still fails if only an article survives (by clipping, photocopy, etc), but that seems like an acceptable tradeoff.

And until it's a common idea it would be helpful to annotate such shortened links so that someone unfamiliar with the publisher will recognize them as having a printed expansion included. Superscript "*" usually refers to a note on that page, so perhaps a superscript ">>"?

Re: Aren't you glad you didn't cite this webpage?

#58

Post by g8oz »

dublinben wrote: post #41
jaysonelliot wrote: post #30

I publish a print magazine. Up to this point, we've avoided printing URLs in the magazine, because our printed issues may last longer than the links will stay live. To solve the problem, we're launching our own link shortener this month, and printing our own shortened links in the magazine. That way we can control what happens when link rot sets in, whether redirecting or caching content on our own servers if necessa…

I suggest you take a look at the perma.cc initative. There's no reason to reinvent the robust shortlink, and you won't be obligated to run this system forever.

Also look at digital object identifiers (DOI).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_object_identifier

Re: Aren't you glad you didn't cite this webpage?

#59

Post by sbierwagen »

coldpie wrote: post #14

So, what's the solution, here? It seems reasonable for a court opinion to include a copy of the source, if possible. What about for something like a YouTube video, which could disappear at any time, but can't be represented on paper? How would you agree on a digital format for representing a supreme court opinion?

http://webcitation.org/
Post reply on HN