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

121–130 of 323 posts

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#121

Post by dredmorbius »

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 The website was gone, but had been replaced by a domain squatter with a restrictive robots.txt.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…

IA are specifically refusing to follow robots.txt directives largely on account of just this behaviour.

https://blog.archive.org/2017/04/17/robots-txt-meant-for-sea...

https://archive.org/post/184024/robotstxt-policy-is-a-failur...

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#122

Post by JulianMorrison »

devmunchies wrote: post #104

> But Mr Graham argued that simply removing false information or offensive content isn’t necessarily the answer. Hateful material need not remain publicly available, he said, but certain researchers and politicians should be able to study it. They're planting the seed and seeing how the public reacts. This is ridiculous! Mark something "controversial", "possibly fake", but don't memory-hole us. An archive only archiv…

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.

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#123

Post by not_a_cop75 »

ntzm wrote: post #117
emilfihlman wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>An archive only archiving history they agree with is not worth the funding. 100%. It reduces the entire point to just voluntarily donating to your favourite think tank or political party, not an "archive".

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?

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#124

Post by dredmorbius »

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 Internet Archive are a registered library.

Their About page talks around this though doesn't address the point specifically. It's the best reference I can come up with right now:

https://archive.org/about/

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#125

Post by LukeShu »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #114
LukeShu wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The exemption was renewed in 2006 and in 2010 (the would-be-2009 decision was delivered late), but was not renewed in 2012. That said, the exemption was to allow legally bypassing the copy-protection mechanisms; that were preventing otherwise-legal copying. Once they bypassed the mechanism to get a non-copy-protected copy in 2003-2012, they may continue distributing copies of it now, since the act of copying was/is l…

Distributing copyright works without a license is usually infringing though.

I'm not familiar with the details, but it is my understanding that their status as a library helps a lot with that side of it.

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#126

Post by cameronbrown »

JulianMorrison wrote: post #122
devmunchies wrote: post #104

> But Mr Graham argued that simply removing false information or offensive content isn’t necessarily the answer. Hateful material need not remain publicly available, he said, but certain researchers and politicians should be able to study it. They're planting the seed and seeing how the public reacts. This is ridiculous! Mark something "controversial", "possibly fake", but don't memory-hole us. An archive only archiv…

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.

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.

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#127

Post by dredmorbius »

tpmx wrote: post #17
kd3 wrote: post #3

These guys are heroes.

I used to think that. Then I tried volunteering via their IRC channel and was met with some next level hostility. My read is: a) They're doing a job that needs to be done. b) They're relatively flush with cash from donors c) They're not nearly as efficient as they could be. d) The people there seemed more concerned about competition than collaboration. e) Probably most controversial: The organization seems like it ha…

ArchiveTeam is NOT the Internet Archive, though the two groups work closely. If you hit the AT's IRC channel, you probably got bounced or told to go to the discussion side channel.

The main ArchiveTeam channel on Efnet is basically for "the house is on fire" emergencies. Normally you'll be asked to bounce to the chat/discussion channel. That may be inconsistently applied.

I worked with ArchiveTeam in the G+ shutdown process and have only fantastic things to say about them. Highly competent, considerate, and GTD/GSD.

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#128

Post by JulianMorrison »

cameronbrown wrote: post #126
JulianMorrison wrote: post #122

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.

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.

Honestly, no it's not. When society doesn't just ban, but abhor Nazis, then Nazi groups are small. There's people who are into rejection, but it's not a lot.

When Society sees Nazi things as forbidden fruit and makes them widely available, then you get the bully types dabbling in it, and it's more widespread.

And when society permits it to be mainstream politics, you're one solid resistance movement away from genocide.

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#129

Post by fromthestart »

JulianMorrison wrote: post #122
devmunchies wrote: post #104

> But Mr Graham argued that simply removing false information or offensive content isn’t necessarily the answer. Hateful material need not remain publicly available, he said, but certain researchers and politicians should be able to study it. They're planting the seed and seeing how the public reacts. This is ridiculous! Mark something "controversial", "possibly fake", but don't memory-hole us. An archive only archiv…

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]

Re: The Internet Archive is waging war on misinformation

#130

Post by narrator »

JulianMorrison wrote: post #122
devmunchies wrote: post #104

> But Mr Graham argued that simply removing false information or offensive content isn’t necessarily the answer. Hateful material need not remain publicly available, he said, but certain researchers and politicians should be able to study it. They're planting the seed and seeing how the public reacts. This is ridiculous! Mark something "controversial", "possibly fake", but don't memory-hole us. An archive only archiv…

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.

So... people are stupid and easily manipulated. Democracy is just a skinner box run by all the god like people who know better than all the stupid sheep, right?
Post reply on HN