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

Our investigation into the suspicious pressure on Archive.today

adguard-dns.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 473 posts

Re: Our investigation into the suspicious pressure on Archive.today

#341

Post by miohtama »

saturnite wrote: post #215
AstralStorm wrote: post #193

How can you even sue without any legal identity? This website and an organisation does not happen to have any. Might as well be some shell company in the Carribeans with no legal standing in France. It's not even good enough for public prosecution, as the tip would then go through French services. This law is completely backwards, and worse than a SLAPP. If you cannot respond to a report in any way, it should be null…

I remember when publishers were suing individuals using nothing more than a list of IP addresses. Those crazy times seem to have come around again.

It's still being done

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/02/isp-sued-by-reco...

Re: Our investigation into the suspicious pressure on Archive.today

#342

Post by _--__--__ »

soniclettuce wrote: post #277
msp26 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://saucenao.blogspot.com/2021/04/recent-events.html Mildly related incident where a Canadian child protection agency uploads csam onto a reverse image search engine and then reports the site for the temporarily stored images.

They were not uploading files. They were crawling the site with URLs that in turn made the search engine retrieve the CSAM and display it. Still shitty, but more obviously a technical mistake than a deliberate ploy.

A mistake that they continued making for weeks or even months after being clearly informed by multiple reverse-image search providers of what they were doing.

Re: Our investigation into the suspicious pressure on Archive.today

#343

Post by permo-w »

trimethylpurine wrote: post #148
InsomniacL wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought they were suggesting it was a government body (an FBI operation)

I understood that they suspect a lone unknown criminal, and that they filed a police report based on that suspicion.

my understanding of the article is that they suspect FBI involvement based on the timing but don't have any concrete evidence to support it

Re: Our investigation into the suspicious pressure on Archive.today

#344

Post by ksynwa »

dizhn wrote: post #262
econ wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their DNS is great. Removing websites without a good reason would quickly ruin everything for them.

Their pihole alternative is great too. Single go binary. Fantastic software.

Is it open source?

Re: Our investigation into the suspicious pressure on Archive.today

#345

Post by ksynwa »

Tangential but how does archive.today stack up against other archiving services? I've always found it faster and more reliable than the wayback machine and ghostarchive. The paywall bypass feature is also invaluable to be but I don't know if other services have that provision. I would be really sad if it went down.

Re: Our investigation into the suspicious pressure on Archive.today

#348

Post by oblio »

valicord wrote: post #209
AstralStorm wrote: post #193

How can you even sue without any legal identity? This website and an organisation does not happen to have any. Might as well be some shell company in the Carribeans with no legal standing in France. It's not even good enough for public prosecution, as the tip would then go through French services. This law is completely backwards, and worse than a SLAPP. If you cannot respond to a report in any way, it should be null…

If you can sue shark fins, why not a website? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Approximately...

French law is based on an entirely different legal system compared to US (and Anglosphere law):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_legal_systems...

It might not be possible to do something like that in France (though I assume there are other mechanisms available in that case).

Re: Our investigation into the suspicious pressure on Archive.today

#349

Post by Dilettante_ »

wartywhoa23 wrote: post #338
Dilettante_ wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now I think we're having two different conversations again? If I understand your point about the "battlefield between pure will/determinism and pure chance/entropy" correctly, you're talking about more of a psychological, individual, "is there a meaning to life, the universe and everything" type direction? What I was trying to drive at was really more of a "in the framework of Laplace's Demon, your choices in the pre…

False dichotomy, we're talking about the same. In the framework of Laplace's Demon, no single human, the whole humankind nor any machine or algorithm it creates is capable of 100% precise prediction of anything at the level of operation of said Demon. If there's any experiment proving otherwise, I'd like to know. If you insist that we talk about 100% prediction of my personal choices, let's play a simple game of gues…

  [nothing] is capable of 100% precise prediction of anything at the level of operation of said Demon
No see I actually agree. See my original post:

  It's complicated and functionally impossible to predict with any certainty, but the future *is* certain.
I thought your disagreement was with my central point of strict determinism, meaning past, future and present are all set in stone, but you've agreed with this on account of the Demon. So I am entirely lost on what your point actually is.

Re: Our investigation into the suspicious pressure on Archive.today

#350

Post by oblio »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #84
Havoc wrote: post #46

The amount of forces seemingly actively trying to kill the internet of old is disconcerting. Chat control, DNS as arbiter of whats allowed, walled gardens etc.

The internet will be destroyed as countries the world over seek to impose all of their silly and incompatible laws on it. The international network will fracture into multiple national networks with heavy filtering at the borders. I've been making this prediction for years now. Words can hardly capture the sadness I feel when I see evidence of its slow realization. I'm happy to have known the true internet. Truly one…

Realistically, how could it have worked otherwise?

The internet was just ignored for a long time because it was at first a) too small and then b) too beneficial with the current architecture to try to tame.

However we're in stage c) it's too big and too dangerous for countries so it needs to be placed back in the country box.

Kind of like the history of oil, which was at first a) about individuals (Rockefeller), then about b) companies (Standard Oil), and finally, about c) countries (most big oil companies are either fully state owned or so tied at the hip with the government that they're basically state owned).

It's complicated, but ultimately, utopia doesn't exist. Most people don't really want open borders (and those that do, haven't fully thought things through), and countries in our current configuration, are still a good thing in most places. So yeah, we were always bound to reach some sort of "national internet" stage.

Post reply on HN