[deleted]
Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content
31–40 of 262 posts
Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content
#32Is there any WordPress plugin that adds a link to the WayBack Machine next to the original link? I would use something like that.
Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content
#33In practice however, archive.org did censor content based on political preference.
Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content
#34But how certain is the future of WayBackMachine, when disaster strikes, all your links are dead. On the other hand, the original links can still be read from the url, so the original reference is not completely gone.
INTERNETARCHIVE.BAK: The INTERNETARCHIVE.BAK project (also known as IA.BAK or IABAK) is a combined experiment and research project to back up the Internet Archive's data stores, utilizing zero infrastructure of the Archive itself (save for bandwidth used in download) and, along the way, gain real-world knowledge of what issues and considerations are involved with such a project. Started in April 2015, the project alr…
I wish there were a way to get a low-rez copy of their entire archive. So, only text, no images, binaries, PDFs (other than PDFs converted to text which they seem to do). As it stands the archive is so huge, the barrier to mirroring is high.
Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content
#35On the same topic, I wish I could link with highlights in the page. Having a spec for highlights in URLS would be neat.
Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content
#36This is a bad idea... In the worst case one might write a cool article and get two hits, one noticing it exists, and the other from the archive service. After that it might go viral, but the author may have given up by then. The author is losing out on inbound links so google thinks their site is irrelevant and gives it a bad pagerank. All you need to do is get archive.org to take a copy at the time, you can always a…
There's no reason that pagerank couldn't be adapted to take into account wayback machine urls, there is a link with a url pointing at https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://news.ycombinator.com/ google could easily register that as a link to both resources - one to web.archive, the other to the site.
there is also no reason why that has to become a slippery slope, if anyone is going to ask "but where do you stop!!"
Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content
#37You 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...
Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content
#38So, this is the problem of persistence of URL's always referencing the original content, regardless of where it is hosted, in an authoritative way. It's an okay idea to link to WB, because (a) it's de facto assumed to be authoritative by the wider global community and (b) as an archive it provides a promise that it's URL's will keep pointing to the archived content come what may. Though, such promises are just that:…
> Moreover, when you link to the WB machine, what do you link to? A specific archived version? Or the overview page with many different archived versions? Which of those versions is currently endorsed by the original publisher, and which are deprecated? How do you know this?
WB also supports linking to the very latest version. If the archive is updated frequently enough I would say it is reasonable to link to that if you use WB just as a mirror. In some cases I've seen error pages being archived after the original page has been moved or removed though but that is probably just a technical issue caused by some website misconfiguration or bad error handling.
Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content
#39You 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...
Yeah. That requires access to all sites. I wasn't comfortable adding another addon with that permission.
The permission is just for a simple reason and should be off by default. It is so you can right click a link on any page and select 'archive' from the menu. Small function, but requires access to all sites.
Re: Why I link to Wayback Machine instead of original web content
#40I'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…
Would be nice if there's an automatic way to have a link revert to the Wayback Machine once the original link stops working. I can't think of an easy way to do that, though.
Either a browser extension, or an 'active' system where your site checks the health of the pages it links to.