zlacker

Archive.is is unironically one of the most important websites in the world. I hope this mess gets fixed but I am not holding my breath because we are in the same position for years now.

Interesting read on the probable owner of the site : https://webapps.stackexchange.com/a/149405

>>deadal+(OP)
That reads a lot like doxxing; if someone isn't open about their identity, they don't want it out, and doing sleuthing work like this (or linking to it) can be considered doxxing.

If archive.is hosts content that has been removed due to oppressive regimes' policies (including western ones), exposing their identity may put them at risk.

>>deadal+(OP)
Linked in Profile does not exit anymore. But

"Bachelor of Engineering Bachelor at the Humboldt University of Berlin."

This sounds fishy. I am not sure that you can get an Engineering degree at this University.

>>pacman+E1
Currently only B.A. and B.Sc. as per their studying guide.

I don't know whether on the past there was some way to obtain said degree.

Edit: A different Bachelors besides those two are incredibly rare in Germany. For full universities (not universities of applied science) doubly so.

>>Cthulh+d1
That would be security by obscurity- something which the creator of such an important website does not have the privilege of relying on.

>>pacman+E1
Is “Informatics” a Bachelor of Engineering?

https://www.informatik.hu-berlin.de/de/studium/Master

>>deadal+(OP)
Everything on archive.is is on archive.org. I would say 99% of stuff.

If archive.is goes down we have webcitation.org, etched.page, ghostarchive.org, webrecorder.net, etc....

>>oeneta+O5
archive.org obeys the robots.txt exclusion but archive.today doesn't. This means that many websites(like 4chan) cannot be archived with archive.org.

>>sweetb+z5
The parent comment is pointing out the moral/etiquette/guideline issue, not making a judgement about security posture.

>>konsch+G5
Informatics is roughly what's called computer science in the US.

>>deadal+l7
That's true, so does webcitation.org, which doesn't obey robots.txt.

4chan has archives dedicated for that site anyway (Warosu, etc.).

>>oeneta+O5
>Everything on archive.is is on archive.org. I would say 99% of stuff.

Given how a LOT of the stuff today is behind paywalls and Archive.today breaks through most of them and Archive.org doesn't, your "99%" figure is way, way off when it comes to popular stuff.

Anyway, I donate to both the Archive.today and Archive.org. They're extremely valuable to me. I feel like Archive.today is in a dire situation when it comes to funding so I donate more than double to them each month.

If you're able, please donate to these sites. They are running on fumes. And take a look at my profile for a list of other orgs to donate to.

>>Cthulh+d1
I find this highly implausible, all of the accounts archive.is is "logged into" would have to be put there in a very explicit manner. I'd assume that all of the accounts are fake or appropriated accounts.

For example @volth on Github - as a person - is still around in other places, so I'm guessing that account was stolen and they don't have a way to get it back.

>>Jerry2+O9
I should have said 99% of stuff that is at risk of being lost forever. Paywalled content from major news companies isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

>>Cthulh+d1
I think the question asked on SE "On which country are the creators and servers of archive.today / archive.is based?" incurs not a 'who is he', but 'should I trust them based on their national allegiance'. A similar idea could be presented of large Twitter misinformation accounts that have influenced the 2016-2020 (and future) elections - they're not open about their identity, but the actions they're doing most people would disagree with, so most would decide that it is morally justifiable to go digging for clues to find the source of the misinformation.

For archive.is, it's lower-stakes, but you might not be able to trust the site as an authoritative source in $x years should (for example) their home government take it over and strategically modify archives for their own purposes.

>>Cthulh+d1
The operator of archive.is is circumventing copyright law in close to every country on earth, including all the democratic ones. Its unique selling point is that they do not comply with site owners' requests not to archive content or to delete content archived in the past.

While that doesn't exclude them from the protection of law, my conviction is slightly weaker when it comes to arbitrary standards of behaviour people on reddit invented. How many pages to they happily serve that contain private information long deleted from the actual websites? When they mutter under their breath, "information wants to be free" (as they are want to be, at least how I imagine it), does their definition of information include their identity?

(I'm slightly irritated by the "research" in that post, though... I really don't need Wikipedia to believe that -vich is a jewish name. And jewish names of Ukrainian/Russian origin are certainly not specific to that location today. I bet there are more people with that last name in Florida than in all of Eastern Europe combined)

>>KarlKe+2c
Archiving the Internet is not stealing the history books. It’s writing them.

>>deadal+(OP)
"Archive.is is unironically one of the most important websites in the world"

Are you sure you're not confusing it with the internet archive https://www.archive.org/

>>m463+Cc
I am not talking about archive.org

Archive.is is faster and does not respect robots.txt. It is recommended by Wikipedia and is widely used by journalists worldwide.

>>deadal+te
Both sites are important, used by Wikipedia editors, and used by journalists worldwide.

>>random+Bc
I don't think we need metaphors to grasp what it is. Its importance is so obvious, even the people that wrote copyright law created an exemption for.

That exemption includes an opt-out provision. And while I could see how ignoring such requests could be in the public interest in some cases, ignoring them wholesale is fundamentally incompatible with any view of morality that condemns "doxing".

>>konsch+G5
no in germany informatics is bachelor of science

>>KarlKe+Dh
I condemn doxing in principle. But if it’s out there once, it’s out there. To try to stuff the genie back only harms those who lack the information, regardless of intent.

I understand you don’t care for metaphors but I can’t help wondering who you mean by “we”? Perhaps “we” are not the intended audience. Please let “we” know “we” are free to ignore.