21–30 of 230 posts
I hadn't heard of Archiveteam before, but the fact that HN brings their site down doesn't make me too confident in their backing up skills :)
Hmm, I've been playing with IPFS lately, and just had an idea: Since IPFS is perfect for archival, Archiveteam could put their files on IPFS, and users could help out by pinning stuff on their local nodes. For example, I could ask their website to give me a 10 GB list of files to pin (if I wanted to "donate" 10 GB to them), and I'd keep them available. The only problem is that I don't know whether IPFS has any way to…
ArchiveTeam is putting the files in the Internet Archive archives. While IPFS is great, I'm not sure I agree it's good for archival because it depends on the availability of the IPFS network. The Internet Archive does work to make sure that there are sufficent backups to mean they can recreate their archive.
It would absolutely be the best move for IPFS to be used in this case - maybe something like the AkashaApp guys, albeit for audio-media.
Edit: The Akasha App for those who aren't yet familiar with it - https://akasha.world - brings together IPFS and Ethereum to make a truly distributed peer network for persistent content.
I'm interested in people's opinions on the legality of this. They mention "Archive Team considers the SoundCloud service in danger and, as it hosts a lot of original content, finds it important to prepare to save it selectively (a full grab would be too big and would raise concerns of mass copyright infringement).", but how is downloading any portion of artist's music not copyright infringement? I've written my own S…
To me that means "stuff that's most likely fine to preserve and most likely isn't found on other places".
Also according to Sound Cloud's ToS by using them you are granting all users rights to "to use, copy, listen to offline, repost, transmit or otherwise distribute" your content. So if Archive Team downloads everything they can (that does not in itself violate copyright (i.e. they are not Metallica songs)) there should be no copyright issues.
The more I think about this, the more convinced I am that Archiveteam are actually detrimental (in the long run) to the well-being of the Internet. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the work they do, and without them lots of content would simply disappear. But solving this problem should be at the core of the protocol itself (Xanadu, anyone?[1]), not depending on the resources and goodwill of a single team. Just like…
The more I think about this, the more convinced I am that Archiveteam are actually detrimental (in the long run) to the well-being of the Internet. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the work they do, and without them lots of content would simply disappear. But solving this problem should be at the core of the protocol itself (Xanadu, anyone?[1]), not depending on the resources and goodwill of a single team. Just like…
So as long as there's a patch that somehow works we have at least a solution. If that patch wouldn't be there we'd have nothing.
The more I think about this, the more convinced I am that Archiveteam are actually detrimental (in the long run) to the well-being of the Internet. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the work they do, and without them lots of content would simply disappear. But solving this problem should be at the core of the protocol itself (Xanadu, anyone?[1]), not depending on the resources and goodwill of a single team. Just like…
There is no perfect solution in sight and this a good one until a better one comes along.
Archiveteam seems like a really cool project, what I was wondering (and couldn't find in the FAQ) is who is paying for all the storage? Is it donated by big tech companies?
I hadn't heard of Archiveteam before, but the fact that HN brings their site down doesn't make me too confident in their backing up skills :)
I'm interested in people's opinions on the legality of this. They mention "Archive Team considers the SoundCloud service in danger and, as it hosts a lot of original content, finds it important to prepare to save it selectively (a full grab would be too big and would raise concerns of mass copyright infringement).", but how is downloading any portion of artist's music not copyright infringement? I've written my own S…
IIRC they said "selective backup" To me that means "stuff that's most likely fine to preserve and most likely isn't found on other places". Also according to Sound Cloud's ToS by using them you are granting all users rights to "to use, copy, listen to offline, repost, transmit or otherwise distribute" your content. So if Archive Team downloads everything they can (that does not in itself violate copyright (i.e. they…
Which means you're only allowed to redistribute content through the facilities provided by Soundcloud. You're not allowed to simply download music and share it outside of the website.
That said, simply downloading music from Soundcloud isn't copyright infringement. You have to do that anyway to listen to the music. But redistributing it (outside of Soundcloud) is illegal unless the copyright holder has granted permission to do so, or the work is under Public Domain.