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

241–250 of 317 posts

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

#241

Post by danso »

djsumdog wrote: post #203
a3_nm wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People can still have local copies Yes, but under current copyright laws they are not allowed to distribute them without your consent.

Depending on the license. If you have a CC-BY-SA or public domain at the bottom, then you're allowing people a legal right to keep a copy. In practice, the nature of the web allows everyone to keep copies of everything if they want. But if someone republishes it, then you need to use the DMCA process (for American websites) to take that content down if it violates copyright. Going back to print, what if you print som…

But they can't make copies of their bought copy and distribute those, which is akin to what the Internet Archive does.

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

#242

Post by Arzh »

twostoned wrote: post #217
amelius wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is, it's getting harder every day to find DRM-free content. For audio, CDs are getting out of fashion, and piracy channels lack the seeders because everybody is on Spotify.

Yes. The debate is gone. Young people have a much different view of 'ownership' (I struggled for a better word) than older people. For example, I remember the copyright, file sharing, music piracy arguments and debates from the 90s (Metallica, Napster! Hah) and 00s. But when I talk about this stuff now with people in their early 20s there seems to be less awareness. DRM & 'Stream everything' are the way it is, as if…

That's because 99% of the time the streaming service for music is better than trying to build your own library. It also seems to have a lot less attribution than video stream right now so people don't have to pay attention to where they can stream a specific song, they can use just about any app and get what they are looking for.

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

#243

Post by drchaos »

sarabande wrote: post #157
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.

Sounds like you need the GDPR's "Right to be Forgotten" clause to be in effect.

The GDPR only cares about personally identifying information. So you might be able to ask me to remove your name from the archived blog post, but not the post itself (as long as it does not contain other PII). This is very important, as otherwise someone could vandalize Wikipedia or Github by requiring them to delete all his edits/commits.

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

#244

Post by fiddlerwoaroof »

gnode wrote: post #115
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.

As I mentioned in a top-level comment, you can use robots.txt to disable Internet Archive's (Wayback Machine) archiving of your site. If you dislike your site being archived, I suggest you do this. Their intention is not to be a monster of the Internet who embarrass creators against their will.

This is a major issue with the internet archive because it allows subsequent owners of a domain to blackhole the previous content.

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

#245

Post by amelius »

Arzh wrote: post #242
twostoned wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. The debate is gone. Young people have a much different view of 'ownership' (I struggled for a better word) than older people. For example, I remember the copyright, file sharing, music piracy arguments and debates from the 90s (Metallica, Napster! Hah) and 00s. But when I talk about this stuff now with people in their early 20s there seems to be less awareness. DRM & 'Stream everything' are the way it is, as if…

That's because 99% of the time the streaming service for music is better than trying to build your own library. It also seems to have a lot less attribution than video stream right now so people don't have to pay attention to where they can stream a specific song, they can use just about any app and get what they are looking for.

> That's because 99% of the time the streaming service for music is better than trying to build your own library.

What good is "better" if songs disappear every now and then?

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

#246

Post by superkuh »

thisisit wrote: post #20

If the page loads completely then yes it redirects to medium.com. But you can read the article by interrupting the redirect and clicking the stop button.

It never even happens if you don't have javascript enabled. Unfortunately as of last year archive.org changed their site and wayback machine design so that it is no longer possible to use without javascript.

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

#247

Post by foldr »

OrganicMSG wrote: post #240
foldr wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>When the author burns their own book and forbids new ones from being made is the only time that it's acceptable to print new copies. Do you mean acceptable from a legal point of view? Because I seriously doubt that it is.

Without that view, we wouldn't have most of the works by Kafka.

No, the only issue raised by Kafka's request to burn his papers is whether or not the copyright passed to someone else on his death. All works eventually become public domain, regardless of the author's wishes, since people die and copyright has a time limit.

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

#248

Post by drchaos »

tankenmate wrote: post #125
icebraining wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no scenario where they can respond to the vast scale of GDPR violations that their archive likely represents, when it comes to manually removing content. "GDPR violations". What's that, exactly? As far as I know, you only have to remove personal data upon request, no preemptively. So I don't see how they are "violations". Will a lot of people make these requests? Possibly, but where's the evidence of that? Pe…

Actually the recommended data handling says you should specifically state the purpose for needing the data, and that it should be reasonably limited to that need; i.e. if you don't need it any more you should pro-actively delete it.[0] [0] https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1475/de... Pages 4-6

They do have a legitimate interest (in the sense of article 6(1) of the GDPR), namely providing an internet archive.

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

#249

Post by Retric »

Arzh wrote: post #242
twostoned wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. The debate is gone. Young people have a much different view of 'ownership' (I struggled for a better word) than older people. For example, I remember the copyright, file sharing, music piracy arguments and debates from the 90s (Metallica, Napster! Hah) and 00s. But when I talk about this stuff now with people in their early 20s there seems to be less awareness. DRM & 'Stream everything' are the way it is, as if…

That's because 99% of the time the streaming service for music is better than trying to build your own library. It also seems to have a lot less attribution than video stream right now so people don't have to pay attention to where they can stream a specific song, they can use just about any app and get what they are looking for.

Depends on your tastes. If you only really care about say 100 ish or fewer CD's worth of music then you can easily hit that and save money vs a streaming service. So for someone like me they are a complete waste of money.

Remember, 70 years * 10$ / month ~= 8,400$ for music over a lifetime. By comparison you can easily buy say every piece of music by Bob Marley and your done no need to ever do so again.

Sure, if you really care about music then a service is great.

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

#250

Post by kgwgk »

JimDabell wrote: post #163
zeth___ wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ireland's language is actually Gaelic. It's the only country in the EU that does not require it's language in translations because even in Ireland nearly no one speaks it.

Ireland has two official languages defined in the constitution – Irish and English.

I think he refers to the fact that each EU country notifies one official language and only UK picked English. But I guess they have found, or will find, a way to maintaing things as they are.

http://eltelawjournal.hu/what-language-for-europe/

Post reply on HN