Link rot and content drift are endemic to the web • Hacker News Board

Re: Link rot and content drift are endemic to the web

#81

Post by bentcorner » Wed, Jun 30, 2021, 5:39 PM UTC

kylestlb wrote: post #37

ballenf wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe the reason it feels impossible to stem the tide of link rot is that it's takes tremendous energy to constantly increase the entropy of a system. And that energy has opportunity cost that no one really wants to talk about. The article has the unstated assumption that eternal preservation of all writing ever is a net benefit. I think it's worth having a discussion on that point.

I disagree that the unstated assumption is eternal preservation of all writing. IMO the author is clearly focusing on official or semi-official published information, not necessarily what you and I write on places like HN.

And there's the irony that's pointed out in the article as well - official documentation on government websites may not last past an elected official's term, yet blithe comments on a social media site that are later regretted may last forever.

Re: Link rot and content drift are endemic to the web

#82

Post by jl6 » Wed, Jun 30, 2021, 5:43 PM UTC

okareaman wrote: post #24

Buddhists chuckle at the notion of permanence and go back to constructing sand mandalas

Accepting the impermanence of all things is an important lesson, but it is not an excuse for nihilism, because even impermanent things can have value, however finite, and the impossibility of true permanence doesn’t have to distract from realising finite value while it lasts.

Re: Link rot and content drift are endemic to the web

#83

Post by PaulHoule » Wed, Jun 30, 2021, 5:43 PM UTC

junon wrote: post #52

JKCalhoun wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Domains, if not outright sold by the owner, should die then.

Or ICANN can create policies about domain squatting like GP described.

Or the FDA could put alternative-health scammers in jail.

Back in the 1950s they put Wilhem Reich in jail, where he died. L. Ron Hubbard got the hint and left the country and when no country was safe he went to sea.

Today people like Dr. Oz run alt-health scams continuously and nobody seems to go to jail or even get a fine.

Re: Link rot and content drift are endemic to the web

#84

Post by tgbugs » Wed, Jun 30, 2021, 5:46 PM UTC

The whole architecture of the internet is inside out. People have become numb to the insanity of encountering null pointers multiple times per day. This is understandable since the inside out structure is what allowed the web to grow quickly, but it will also be what ultimately dooms it as a real lasting store for knowledge.

The problem is that the foundations are shifting sands, and we need something that has significantly more integrity at the bottom layer, we can't just bolt URNs on as an afterthought. Some organizations are able to maintain persistent data over time, but it is in spite of the technology, not because of it.

I will also note that a world where it is possible to delete things is a world where individuals can be made to have written anything in the past. On the internet, at a certain point the past can be fabricated from whole cloth.

edit: and ironically, the issue is that this is because the internet wasn't actually academic enough in its original design.

Re: Link rot and content drift are endemic to the web

#85

Post by throwawayboise » Wed, Jun 30, 2021, 5:51 PM UTC

tda wrote: post #69

makomk wrote: post #63

It's amazing how little some trusted institutions care about this. For example, the BBC has been bragging about how many people rely on their coverage of the pandemic, but have an obnoxious habit of repeatedly overwriting old articles with new ones on similar topics and not keeping the old versions available. The history of a once-in-a-century pandemic with huge local and global impacts is literally being overwritten…

On the bright side, using a tool like Internet archive it should be easy to filter out which articles were removed and/or edited by the BBC, in a way highlighting the most historically important articles.

I mean yes, if you are extremely motivated. But the wayback machine is pretty klunky and slow, honestly. And there's no good "diff" view that summarizes the changes to a URL over time AFAIK.

Re: Link rot and content drift are endemic to the web

#86

Post by ganzuul » Wed, Jun 30, 2021, 5:53 PM UTC

tgbugs wrote: post #84

The whole architecture of the internet is inside out. People have become numb to the insanity of encountering null pointers multiple times per day. This is understandable since the inside out structure is what allowed the web to grow quickly, but it will also be what ultimately dooms it as a real lasting store for knowledge. The problem is that the foundations are shifting sands, and we need something that has signif…

We should have kept developing Usenet. Handing control over to web browser providers was a mistake.

Re: Link rot and content drift are endemic to the web

#87

Post by stickfigure » Wed, Jun 30, 2021, 5:55 PM UTC

PaulHoule wrote: post #7

djoldman wrote: post #3

> People tend to overlook the decay of the modern web, when in fact these numbers are extraordinary—they represent a comprehensive breakdown in the chain of custody for facts. This is a particularly good quote to sum up the article. The internet is not a repository of facts, it is a repository of facts, spam, junk, and things . Moreover, it is not the only repository of these. Link rot happens. Content is subject to…

It's depressing. I know somebody who started a business that was successful for a while and then failed. Spammers got control of the domain and now it is full of ads for a dangerous diet drug. What makes my blood boil is that it impugns the integrity of the founder who is a decent person who has nothing to do with that scam.

This actually happened to me:

https://www.voo.st/

We shut down the business an abandoned the domain. Someone registered the domain, created a similar-looking website by hand (recycling a lot of the text and images), and added spam. It even has my old company address.

This is a .st domain, about $35/yr. The web design work cost something too. More than I would have expected the link juice from a single website to be worth.

What we really need is some sort of DNS record or meta content we can add that tells search engines "this domain is being abandoned, destroy all link juice".

Re: Link rot and content drift are endemic to the web

#88

Post by throwawayboise » Wed, Jun 30, 2021, 5:56 PM UTC

pfraze wrote: post #71

ergot_vacation wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having read the whole thing, it seems partially good, martially misguided, and partially terrible. The overall bent is a hand-wringing about link rot, which I thought we mostly got over a decade ago. The Internet is fundamentally ephemeral. If you see something you like, save it so you can repost it later. If you rely on someone else to keep in up indefinitely, you're being foolish. Around the edges of that main disc…

I'm not 100% convinced by your assertion that censorship only favors the rich and powerful. It can and often does, but it can also help people without power or society and large. For instance, taking down a dox for a niche YouTuber is clearly not helping a powerful person, but it's still arguably censorship. The misinformation area is somewhat stickier, but here's a decent example: if somebody decided to hurt you by…

> if somebody decided to hurt you by spreading rumors

We have libel laws to address that.

GPs point is that Google, Facebook, et. al. are premptively censoring non-mainstream content just to protect themselves. They don't really care about the public.

Re: Link rot and content drift are endemic to the web

#89

Post by throwawayboise » Wed, Jun 30, 2021, 5:58 PM UTC

codingdave wrote: post #62

majormajor wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many how to videos, memes, concerts, etc, are really that important? In fifty years how many people will care? How many people should care because it would mean ignoring the huge volume of newer stuff? A hundred years? Two hundred? I haven't even read or seen many of the existing cultural artifacts we have from past decades and centuries, what would I do if orders of magnitudes more of them had been preserved? In…

If you grew up before the internet, surely you remember all the DIY manuals that lived in everyone's home. Everyone had that same big hardbound book of how to do basic home repairs. Many people had sewing books, electrical books, Chilton manuals for their cars. Cookbooks, too. We have valued how-to information for decades, and that interest and need far pre-dates the internet. So while I get what you are saying that…

There will probably always be niche sources for specific "how to" information. YouTube is currently a low-effort way to make that generally available in video format, but it's certainly not the only viable solution, and the information you can get from a specific enthusiast site or forum is often better and more detailed.

Re: Link rot and content drift are endemic to the web

#90

Post by mountainb » Wed, Jun 30, 2021, 5:58 PM UTC

makomk wrote: post #63

It's amazing how little some trusted institutions care about this. For example, the BBC has been bragging about how many people rely on their coverage of the pandemic, but have an obnoxious habit of repeatedly overwriting old articles with new ones on similar topics and not keeping the old versions available. The history of a once-in-a-century pandemic with huge local and global impacts is literally being overwritten…

The BBC publishes nothing but garbage and there are other extant sources that are more durable. It's fine to forget things. We're missing entire libraries of classical literature from great authors which would be nice to have. Missing documentary sewage isn't a tragedy.

This should show us that most of the web isn't worth preserving anyway, much like McDonald's burger wrappers aren't worth preserving like sacred artifacts. Most web and social media content is worth less than said greasy burger wrappers.