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

Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content

hawaiigentech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 262 posts

Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content

#211

Post by imhoguy »

This is building yet another silo and point of failure. We can't pass the entire Internet traffic thru WayBackMachine as its resources are limited.

Most preserving solutions are like that and at the end the funding or business priorities (google groups) become a serious problem.

I think we need something like web - distributed and dumb easy to participate and contribute a preservation space.

Look, there are Torrents available for 17 years [0]. Sure, there are some unintresting long gone but there is always a little chance somebody still has the file and someday becomes online with it.

I know about IPFS/Dat/SBB, but still that stuff, like Bitcoin, is too complex for a layman contributor with a plain altruistic motivation. It should be like SETI@Home - fire and forget. Eventually integrated with a browser to cache content you star/bookmark and share when it is offline.

[0] https://torrentfreak.com/worlds-oldest-torrent-still-alive-a...

Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content

#212

Post by badsectoracula »

kilroy123 wrote: post #37
ffpip wrote: post #10

You can create a bookmark in Firefox to save a link quickly. Bookmark Location- https://web.archive.org/save/%s Keyword - save So searching 'save https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24406193 ' archives this post. You can use any Keyword instead of 'save'. You can also search with https://web.archive.org/*/%s

Nice. I forgot how you can do that. I just use the extension myself: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/wayback-machi...

One issue i have with this extension is that it randomly pops up the 'this site appears to be offline' (which overrides the entire page) even when the site actually works (i hit the back button and it appears). I have it installed for some time now and so far i have almost daily false negatives and only once actually it worked as intended.

Also there doesn't seem to be a way to open a URL directly from the extension which seems a weird omission, so i end up going to the archive site anyway since i very often want to find old long lost sites.

Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content

#213

Post by arendtio »

markjgraham wrote: post #197

We suggest/encourage people link to original URLs but ALSO (as opposed to instead of) provide Wayback Machine URLs so that if/when the original URLs go bad (link rot) the archive URL is available, or to give people a way to compare the content associated with a given URL over time (content drift) BTW, we archive all outlinks from all Wikipedia articles from all Wikipedia sites, in near-real-time... so that we are abl…

I always wonder about rise the hosting costs in the wake of people liking to the Wayback Machine on popular sites.

How do you think about it?

Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content

#214

Post by fireattack »

ffpip wrote: post #138
bad_user wrote: post #93

Earlier 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....

web.archive.org automatically converts the https%3A%2F things to https:// for me. I noticed it many times. If you are still facing problems, go to https://web.archive.org . In the bottom right 'Save page now' field, right click and select 'add keyword for search'. Choose your desired keyword.

>web.archive.org automatically converts the https%3A%2F

Did you try the link provided by the one you replied to?

Because it says "HTTP 400" here, so apparently it doesn't convert well, at least not in my end.

Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content

#215

Post by fireattack »

badsectoracula wrote: post #212
kilroy123 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nice. I forgot how you can do that. I just use the extension myself: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/wayback-machi...

One issue i have with this extension is that it randomly pops up the 'this site appears to be offline' (which overrides the entire page) even when the site actually works (i hit the back button and it appears). I have it installed for some time now and so far i have almost daily false negatives and only once actually it worked as intended. Also there doesn't seem to be a way to open a URL directly from the extension…

It pops up when there is a HTTP 404 status code or similar returned. So these false negatives are likely due to the specific sites that are configured in a wacky way.

(Don't get me wrong, it is still very annoying for the user regardless what the cause is.)

Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content

#216

Post by tracker1 »

markjgraham wrote: post #197

We suggest/encourage people link to original URLs but ALSO (as opposed to instead of) provide Wayback Machine URLs so that if/when the original URLs go bad (link rot) the archive URL is available, or to give people a way to compare the content associated with a given URL over time (content drift) BTW, we archive all outlinks from all Wikipedia articles from all Wikipedia sites, in near-real-time... so that we are abl…

I mostly agree... however, given how many "news" sites are now going back and completely changing articles (headlines, content) without any history, I think it's a mixed bag.

Link rot isn't the only reason why one would want an archive link instead of original. Not that I'd want to overwhelm the internet archive's resources.

Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content

#217

Post by punnerud »

markjgraham wrote: post #197

We suggest/encourage people link to original URLs but ALSO (as opposed to instead of) provide Wayback Machine URLs so that if/when the original URLs go bad (link rot) the archive URL is available, or to give people a way to compare the content associated with a given URL over time (content drift) BTW, we archive all outlinks from all Wikipedia articles from all Wikipedia sites, in near-real-time... so that we are abl…

I love the feature that you easily can add a page to archive: https://web.archive.org/save/https://example.com

Replace https://example.com from the URL above. I try to respect the cost of archiving, by not saving to often the same page.

Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content

#218

Post by notriddle »

3pt14159 wrote: post #145
silicon2401 wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

The issue is that if this becomes widespread then we're going to get into copyright claims against the wayback machine. When I write content it is mine. I don't even let Facebook crawlers index it because I don't want it appearing on their platform. I'm happy to have wayback machine archive it, but that's with the understanding that it is a backup, not an authoritative or primary source. Ideally, links would be able…

There already have been copyright claims against The Wayback Machine. They've been responding to it by allowing site owners to use robots.txt to remove their content.

Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content

#219

Post by badsectoracula »

fireattack wrote: post #215
badsectoracula wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One issue i have with this extension is that it randomly pops up the 'this site appears to be offline' (which overrides the entire page) even when the site actually works (i hit the back button and it appears). I have it installed for some time now and so far i have almost daily false negatives and only once actually it worked as intended. Also there doesn't seem to be a way to open a URL directly from the extension…

It pops up when there is a HTTP 404 status code or similar returned. So these false negatives are likely due to the specific sites that are configured in a wacky way. (Don't get me wrong, it is still very annoying for the user regardless what the cause is.)

Does it pop up for any 404 error? If so it might be some script or font or whatever resource the site itself is using that would otherwise fail silently. If not... then there has to be some other bug/issue because i get it for many different sites that shouldn't have it.

Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content

#220

Post by fireattack »

badsectoracula wrote: post #219
fireattack wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It pops up when there is a HTTP 404 status code or similar returned. So these false negatives are likely due to the specific sites that are configured in a wacky way. (Don't get me wrong, it is still very annoying for the user regardless what the cause is.)

Does it pop up for any 404 error? If so it might be some script or font or whatever resource the site itself is using that would otherwise fail silently. If not... then there has to be some other bug/issue because i get it for many different sites that shouldn't have it.

Nope, only for the "main" page (for lack of a better word), and when there is an archive for it.
Post reply on HN