Archive Team: A Smattering of Tweets
archive.org
Archive Team: A Smattering of Tweets
1–10 of 121 posts
Re: Archive Team: A Smattering of Tweets
#2Honestly, I wish tweets were treated like verbal exchanges more than written. Not everything that is said needs to be recorded for perpetuity. If a politician or someone powerful tweets, then sure it might be in someone's interest to record it. Good luck to them. But unless you're someone that people really care about - it should be fine to just delete your tweet for good. If that means something problematic was tweeted but lost, then so be it.
Re: Archive Team: A Smattering of Tweets
#3What are the legal implications of this in regards to the right of being forgotten, copyright laws or even the simple issue of moderation? For example if someone posts a hateful tweet or some extremist content (e.g. photos of terror, etc.) which goes against the law (and therefore gets taken down by Twitter) is it not reprehensible if archive.org is re-publishing such content?
Re: Archive Team: A Smattering of Tweets
#4What are the legal implications of this in regards to the right of being forgotten, copyright laws or even the simple issue of moderation? For example if someone posts a hateful tweet or some extremist content (e.g. photos of terror, etc.) which goes against the law (and therefore gets taken down by Twitter) is it not reprehensible if archive.org is re-publishing such content?
The reprehensible act is the tweet. Keeping records and archives of what people do in a public forum is not.
Re: Archive Team: A Smattering of Tweets
#5I wonder how this will jive with GDPR/CCPA right to be forgotten laws.
If a person has the right to be forgotten, I can't imagine that this decision will be allowed to continue for so long.
Does the person have to ask for their information to be deleted under these laws? If so, this might be an additional avenue or good next step for protection laws.
Re: Archive Team: A Smattering of Tweets
#6I wonder if that is really necessary. Sure, some accounts (like politicians) may need to be preserved until their words may are no longer significant, but why keep the random tweets of irrelevant accounts.
Re: Archive Team: A Smattering of Tweets
#7What are the legal implications of this in regards to the right of being forgotten, copyright laws or even the simple issue of moderation? For example if someone posts a hateful tweet or some extremist content (e.g. photos of terror, etc.) which goes against the law (and therefore gets taken down by Twitter) is it not reprehensible if archive.org is re-publishing such content?
The reprehensible act is the tweet. Keeping records and archives of what people do in a public forum is not.
But what is not considered reprehensible today may be considered reprehensible tomorrow.
Re: Archive Team: A Smattering of Tweets
#8What are the legal implications of this in regards to the right of being forgotten, copyright laws or even the simple issue of moderation? For example if someone posts a hateful tweet or some extremist content (e.g. photos of terror, etc.) which goes against the law (and therefore gets taken down by Twitter) is it not reprehensible if archive.org is re-publishing such content?
The reprehensible act is the tweet. Keeping records and archives of what people do in a public forum is not.
I disagree. Twitter often takes content down which is very problematic, including of very serious sexual and criminal nature and even other non criminal content such as self harming content by children or other people who go through troubling times. Not everything is a Donald Trump tweet and I see serious problems by a blanket unmoderated archive.
Re: Archive Team: A Smattering of Tweets
#9I wonder if that is really necessary. Sure, some accounts (like politicians) may need to be preserved until their words may are no longer significant, but why keep the random tweets of irrelevant accounts.
The present doesn't know what the future will find valuable.
Put another way: Tomorrow's noteworthy person may be today's nobody.
Re: Archive Team: A Smattering of Tweets
#10I wonder if that is really necessary. Sure, some accounts (like politicians) may need to be preserved until their words may are no longer significant, but why keep the random tweets of irrelevant accounts.
It's sometimes easier to archive everything than to find/decide what deserves to be archived.