There's some subtle irony in that the linked site is not in fact a WayBackMachine link, but instead a direct link to the site.
Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content
181–190 of 262 posts
Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content
#182Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does that `save` keyword work? The problem is %s gets escaped, so Firefox generates this URL, which seems to be invalid: https://web.archive.org/save/https%3A%2F%2Fnews.ycombinator....
Uppercase %S for unescaped, e.g.: https://web.archive.org/web/*/%S
Ah, nice, thanks!
Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content
#183He is actually showcasing a very nice technique to get around paywalls: turn off JS. Often enough that’s enough to get around the paywall. I believe the archives also disable JS when grabbing the content.
That is changing. I've noticed over the past couple of years that sites that could be accessed with JS turned off are now showing a "Please enable Javascript to continue" (Quora) or just hiding the content entirely (Business Insider). I'm sure there are other examples as well.
Not surprised. When paywalls started becoming a thing most of them could be circumvented simply by removing a DOM element and some CSS classes. Nowadays this is basically not possible anywhere anymore.
Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content
#184Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it a deep problem? You can download content you want to keep. There are many services like evernote and pocket that can help you with it.
It is, because it ultimately comes down to owner's control of how their content is being used. For example, a modern news site will want the ability to define which text is "authoritative", and make modifications to it on the fly, including unpublishing it. As a reader OTOH, I want a permanent, immutable copy of everything said site ever publishes, so that silent edits and unpublishing is not possible. These two pers…
Some consumers will want the latest and greatest content. To please everyone (other than the owner) you'd need to look at the content across time, versions, alternate world views,... Thus "deep".
My central use case is that I might 'scrape' content from sources such as
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territ...
and have the process be "repeatable" in the sense that:
1. The system archives the original inputs and the process to create refined data outputs
2. If the inputs change the system should normally be able to download updated versions of the inputs, apply the process and produce good outputs
3. If something goes wrong there are sufficient diagnostics and tests that would show invariants are broken, or that the system can't tell how many fingers you are holding up
4. and in that case you can revert to "known good" inputs
I am thinking of data products here, but even if the 'product' is a paper, presentation, or report that involves human judgements there should be a structured process to propagate changes.
Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content
#185Good idea, by why not both (i.e. link to a webpage, and to the Archive)? Linking to Archive only makes Archive a single point of failure.
I wonder if the anchor tag should be altered to support this?
Alternatively, this is a good thing for a user agent to handles natively, or through a plugin.
Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content
#186> So in Feb 14 2019 your users would have seen the content you intended. However in Sep 07 2020, your users are being asked to support independent Journalism instead. Can you believe it? Yesterday, I tried to walk out of the grocery store with a head of lettuce for free, and they instead were more interested in making me pay money to support the grocery and agricultural business!
Right. I thought it was pretty bad form for him to call this "spam," as though they're the ones wronging him.
Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content
#187No one touched on this but the experience of viewing through the waybackmachine is awful.
Media many times will not be saved so pages look broken. The iframe and the iframe breakers on original sites can kill any navigating.
The waybackmachine is okay for researching but a poor replacement as a perm link.
Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
I certainly don't know about legal rights, but I think the ethical thing is to make sure that any writings published as freely accessible should remain so forever. What would people think if an author went into every library in the world to yank out one of their books they no longer want to be seen? I do think the author is wrong to immediately post links to archived versions of sources. At the least, he could link t…
I'm not sure I agree. I know that journalism (as a discipline) considers this ethical. I kinda get that this is part of the newspaper industry as a public service - that withdrawing publication of something, or changing it without alerting the reader to the change, alters the historical record. But no-one has a problem with other creative industries withdrawing their publications. Film-makers are forever deciding tha…
> But no-one has a problem with other creative industries withdrawing their publications
I wouldn't say no one has a problem with this. It does happen, but it certainly doesn't make everyone happy. I for one would like for all released media to be available, or at least not actively removed from access.
Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content
#189I'm not sure I'm a fan of this because it just turns WayBackMachine into another content silo. It's called the world wide web for a reason, and this isn't helping. I can see it for corporate sites where they change content, remove pages, and break links without a moment's consideration. But for my personal site, for example, I'd much rather you link to me directly rather than content in WayBackMachine. Apart from any…
> But for my personal site, for example, I'd much rather you link to me directly rather than content in WayBackMachine. That would make sense if users were archiving your site for your benefit, but they're probably not. If I were to archive your site, it's because I want my own bookmarks/backups/etc to be more reliable than just a link, not because I'm looking out to preserve your website. Otherwise, I'm just gamblin…
> If it's not worth that, then I just keep a bookmark.
I've made a habit of saving every page I bookmark to the WayBackMachine. To my mind, this is the best of both worlds: you'll see any edits, additions, etc. to the source material and if something you remember has been changed or gone missing, you have a static reference. I just wish there was an simple way to diff the two.
I keep meaning to write browser extensions to do both of these things on my behalf ...
Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content
#190Earlier quoted context omitted.
I totally agree. I guess the answer is "don't mess with your old site", but that's also impractical. And I'm sorry, but if it's my site, then it's my site. I reserve the right to mess about with it endlessly. Including taking down a post for whatever reason I like. I'm sorry if that conflicts with someone else's need for everything to stay the same but it's my site. Also, if you're linking to my article, and I decide…
I certainly don't know about legal rights, but I think the ethical thing is to make sure that any writings published as freely accessible should remain so forever. What would people think if an author went into every library in the world to yank out one of their books they no longer want to be seen? I do think the author is wrong to immediately post links to archived versions of sources. At the least, he could link t…
Publishing on your own website is more akin to putting up a signboard on your front lawn than writing a book for publication.
People are free to view it and take pictures for their own records, but I could still take it down and put something else up.