21–30 of 168 posts
If I set up a machine under my desk at home with a domain (courtesy of dynamic DNS), and provide a few terabytes of free-of-charge storage to a small bunch of people, am I "erasing history" if I can't keep all their stuff forever?
Or do I have to be a Youtube-sized corporate entity before I'm a fucking asshole?
Why would you trust a for-profit company to archive anything and care? They don't. It's unreasonable to expect anything different. If you want things archived, non-profit solutions exist, or you should be doing it yourself and making sure the content is shared among people who are also able to archive it.
This is modern day cynicism. I fully understand and am unsurprised by their lack of good storage, but we shouldn't help companies lower the bar of their own existence to be purely profit driven entities.
Not only Youtube, I've noticed a huge disparity between Duck Duck Go results and Google results when writing queries that could be thought of as containing a controversial/politically/racially/etc charged topic. Youtube recommendations and search/ranking suppress searches as it is, even if they were to leave the content on there, most of it will never be surfaced through organic means without a direct link or a searc…
Video from Tim Pool about it: https://youtu.be/tzTod38VS8c
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. You need something like Internet Archive or better that is archival quality, random internet vandalism-proof and FBI raid-proof.
Or even something more distributed. Like each public library has a storage cube and each cube has an overlapping portion of history. They checksum each other peer-to-peer to detect anyone trying to change history. There are 110,000 public libraries in the United States. Plus thousands more private libraries. Seems like enough for U.S. history, at least.
Maybe that's a problem that everyone has? But it would be best if there was some offshore, FBI proof, kind of way to do this archiving.
Youtube and Facebook, while convenient, aren't really appropriate mediums for them to share this sort of footage. Liveleak comes to mind as a service better suited for a public repository of this video. Archival of footage shouldn't be dependent on a third party platform that can, at will, delete every single video on a whim. Likely for this sort of thing a diligent archivist will need to put in the effort of storing…
Exactly. You need something like Internet Archive or better that is archival quality, random internet vandalism-proof and FBI raid-proof.
While NYT themselves just shadow-edited the article about HRC calling Tulsi a Russian asset to a Republican asset. Video from Tim Pool about it: https://youtu.be/tzTod38VS8c
