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

Medium tries to prevent people reading deleted articles on the Wayback Machine?

selectedintelligence.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 317 posts

Re: Medium tries to prevent people reading deleted articles on the Wayback Machine?

#171

Post by matthewmacleod »

walshemj wrote: post #141
matthewmacleod wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your objection is not helpful. Being careless with personal data has harmful consequences. Being careless with food safety has harmful consequences. This is why these things are related.

what personal data is being exposed - the EU isn't keen on anonymous publishing in general eg in the UK any thing published by a political party during elections etc must have both the printers name and their agents - the penalties are quite severe .

I'm really not sure what your point is?

Re: Medium tries to prevent people reading deleted articles on the Wayback Machine?

#172

Post by dingaling »

alerighi wrote: post #18
thogenhaven wrote: post #10

I wonder how wayback machine will work after GDPR? I can't imagine they can just show content that the authors deleted from primary sources?

They can't, and I would like to know what Europe wants to do about it. Block wayback machine in Europe ? Well, I can still access it with a VPN if I want. Also I want to know what they will do about git and GitHub, or even blockchain project (how you delete something from a blockchain ?) The problem is that GDPR is a stupid legislation written by incompetent people that doesn't understand the subject and imposed with…

> cookie banner law, for example

The 'cookie law' is actually subtle genius.

If your site only uses cookies for operational reasons, such as enabling login or maintaining a basket, you don't need to inform the user.

So anytime you see a cookie-banner that indicates that the site is doing something additional with cookies. Like tracking for ad-networks. It's a yellow-flag.

Re: Medium tries to prevent people reading deleted articles on the Wayback Machine?

#174

Post by nbeleski »

djsumdog wrote: post #126
baby wrote: post #94

When I delete an article from my blog, it's because I don't want anyone to be able to read it anymore. Be it shame, inaccuracy, change of mood, etc... I think there is something fundamentally wrong with wanting to have EVERYTHING backed up at all time against the creators' will.

I really like this post: http://archive.li/fi5Xn It's been deleted by its author and archive sites are the only places where I can find copies. I've saved a copy for myself just in case. If you use an article like this as a source, it'd be nice if there were a copy somewhere. This is one of my favourite independent movies: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1527628 I bought a DRM-free copy from the writer/director back whe…

This is an interesting article, if you liked I would reccomend heavily taking a look at Nick Bostrom's Superintelligence. Even though the book has it's own share of problems, it is an interesting approach to Artificial General Intelligence.

On the other points, I would believe this is related to the fact I personally (and I take most here) have spent way too much time on the internet on the past decade(s). I find it amusing the number of times I remember something I've seen or read in the past and how hard it can be to find it again. Or the number of broken links among old blog posts and articles.

Lastly, our lives are way too goddamn short. Thinking that far into the future is hardly productive in my opinion, even if you consider it can be very enlightening.

Re: Medium tries to prevent people reading deleted articles on the Wayback Machine?

#175

Post by chx »

OrganicMSG wrote: post #164
baby wrote: post #94

When I delete an article from my blog, it's because I don't want anyone to be able to read it anymore. Be it shame, inaccuracy, change of mood, etc... I think there is something fundamentally wrong with wanting to have EVERYTHING backed up at all time against the creators' will.

Anything you have ever published is no longer entirely yours and the act of doing so is also a relinquishment of control. Only secrets can ever really be regarded as possessions. Archivists should not require permission to store that which has been put out into the world.

> Anything you have ever published is no longer entirely yours and the act of doing so is also a relinquishment of control.

This is an incredibly bold and huge presumption which absolutely does not mesh with the Berne Convention to begin with.

Re: Medium tries to prevent people reading deleted articles on the Wayback Machine?

#176

Post by simion314 »

walshemj wrote: post #144
icebraining wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where are drugs generally legal?

You just have to look at the effects of the 18th amendment to see the point the OP is making. In the USA it caused massive increase in organized crime and corruption - the effects of which are still with the US today

But you do not know the effects if all drugs were legal and cheap

Re: Medium tries to prevent people reading deleted articles on the Wayback Machine?

#177

Post by sgwilliams »

monoch wrote: post #153
baby wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I won't blame people for storing a private copy, but I will blame people for sharing such copy if it is against my will, especially if they're claiming it is their right and thus my integrity has to suffer.

You are breaking the social contract of copyright when trying to use it as a tool of censorship. The whole underlying rationale for modern copyright was spelled out in the first country to adopt it: >To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries. We, the people, trade our natural right of copy…

What social contract? Technically, archive.org is in violation of copyright. It does not matter if robots.txt allows it or not. Pointing people to "content" like a search engine is fine. Displaying "content" on another website is not.

Even worse is nyud.net, which essentially steals credit.

Re: Medium tries to prevent people reading deleted articles on the Wayback Machine?

#178

Post by ekianjo »

baby wrote: post #94

When I delete an article from my blog, it's because I don't want anyone to be able to read it anymore. Be it shame, inaccuracy, change of mood, etc... I think there is something fundamentally wrong with wanting to have EVERYTHING backed up at all time against the creators' will.

> When I delete an article from my blog

It's not yours anymore once it's public. It's like saying "when I do something crazy in public I want to be able to make everyone forget about it later on". That's not how things are supposed to work.

> I don't want anyone to be able to read it anymore

People can still have local copies so you have absolutely NO CONTROL.

Re: Medium tries to prevent people reading deleted articles on the Wayback Machine?

#179

Post by azeotropic »

baby wrote: post #102
zeth___ wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A simple solution: don't publish things you don't want people to read. This is no different to burning books that the authors no longer support the views in.

So you're incentivizing people not to write. That's bad, we should encourage people to write. It's OK to make mistakes. I see this problem as an even bigger problem with kids. Kids put everything they do online, and they will probably be ashamed of a lot of these things later in life. Comparing that to Facebook: I guess I shouldn't upload pictures on Facebook because it's against my right to want to see one of my old…

Writing is not the same as publishing.

Re: Medium tries to prevent people reading deleted articles on the Wayback Machine?

#180

Post by waydowntogo »

baby wrote: post #94

When I delete an article from my blog, it's because I don't want anyone to be able to read it anymore. Be it shame, inaccuracy, change of mood, etc... I think there is something fundamentally wrong with wanting to have EVERYTHING backed up at all time against the creators' will.

Mainly problem with any services is privacy. There's no privacy on internet.

If you have a blog you have to count with fact that an article will be on internet forever.

My advice is this - write an article today but publish it tomorrow (you'll have time for thinking about an article).

Post reply on HN