207 points

I can’t think of any reason to attack that website, what have they done wrong?

permalink
report
reply
172 points

Archived something someone doesn’t want to be seen by the world… like any and all since-removed misinformation for one…

permalink
report
parent
reply
36 points

tinfoil would suggested the media industry but this seems a bit more “personal”

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

It’s likely to just be some randos doing it for the lulz and IA was vulnerable for whatever reason. Book publishers have sadly been enjoying plenty of success in court against IA. They don’t need to get their hands dirty.

permalink
report
parent
reply
162 points
*

I have zero proof of this so take it for the musing it is, but the Internet Archive/Wayback Machine can be used to view articles that have been taken offline (sometimes for political reasons). The IA is a very accessible way to prove that once something is on the Internet, it’s out there forever. I used it in a recent post to show an Israeli newspaper article that argued Israel had a right to not just Palestine, but Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and other territories. It was taken off the newspaper’s website a few days later, but IA had it.

This may explain why no one is taking credit, and there are no demands. Or it could very well be another reason, including people just being assholes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

so if this is the case then it could be a foreign government

permalink
report
parent
reply
88 points

Yeah, this is a bit like vandalizing a library. They are providing a valuable public service, leave them alone.

permalink
report
parent
reply
36 points

Yeah, and what kind of psychos would want to restrict public access to books in libraries?!?! I’m not on the conspiracy train until there’s proof and I agree with your post. Just saw a bit of irony there since a lot of North Americans are currently in the process of dismantling libraries.

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points

It’s probably for the lulz I guess. There’s only a few places left on the internet that are decent and good, archive being one, so why not shit all over it? People are so dumb.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

There’s currently a fuck ton of hacking going on everywhere maybe just prior to the US elections maybe something unrelated but there’s definitely a concerted effort to turn the internet on its head.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

In this case it’s looking like people trying to showcase their skill and possibly get bragging rights or at least a reputation for doing these attacks which they can use to earn money from others for these types of services.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

We just need to accept that there’s terrible people in this world

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

We see this and think of an amazing and essential public service. A capitalist sees this and tries to find a way to make money with it, and the first step is to ruin the free product.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

The attacker(s) apparently just did it to do it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Dipshits thought it was affiliated with the US government and attacked it to “avenge” Gaza.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-69 points

I just sent a DMCA takedown last week to remove my site. They’ve claimed to follow meta tags and robots.txt since 1998, but no, they had over 1,000,000 of my pages going back that far. They even had the robots.txt configured for them archived from 1998.

I’m tired of people linking to archived versions of things that I worked hard to create. Sites like Wikipedia were archiving urls and then linking to the archive, effectively removing branding and blocking user engagement.

Not to mention that I’m losing advertising revenue if someone views the site in an archive. I have fewer problems with archiving if the original site is gone, but to mirror and republish active content with no supported way to prevent it short of legal action is ridiculous. Not to mention that I lose control over what’s done with that content – are they going to let Google train AI on it with their new partnership?

I’m not a fan. They could easily allow people to block archiving, but they choose not to. They offer a way to circumvent artist or owner control, and I’m surprised that they still exist.

So… That’s what I think is wrong with them.

From a security perspective it’s terrible that they were breached. But it is kind of ironic – maybe they can think of it as an archive of their passwords or something.

permalink
report
parent
reply
45 points

Not to mention that I’m losing advertising revenue if someone views the site in an archive.

No one is using Internet Archive to bypass ads. Anyone who would think of doing that already has ad blockers on.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-12 points

You misunderstood. If they view the site at Internet Archive, our site loses on the opportunity for ad revenue.

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points
*

What do you mean by “engagement”, exactly? Clicking on ads?

In SEO terms user engagement refers to how people interact with the website. Do they click on another link? Does a new blog posting interest them?

Lmao you think Google needs to go through Archive to scrape your site? Delusional.

Any activiity from Google is easier to track and I have a record if who downloaded content if it’s coming from my servers.

The mechanisms used to serve ads over the internet nowadays are nasty in a privacy sense, and a psychological manipulation sense. And you want people to be affected by them just to line your pockets? Are you also opposed to ad blockers by any chance?

I agree that many sites use advertising in a different way. I use it in the older internet sense – someone contacts me to sponsor a page or portion of the site, and that page gets a single banner, created in-house, with no tracking. I’ve been using the internet for 36 years. I’m well aware of many uses that I view as unethical, and I take great pains not to replicate them on my own site.

I disapprove of ad blockers. I approve of things that block tracking.

As far as “lining my own pockets” goes, I want to recoup my hosting costs. I spend hours researching for each article/showcase, make the content free to view, and then I’m expected to pay to share it with anyone who’s interested? I have a day job. This is my hobby, but it’s also my blood, sweat, and tears.

And how do you suggest a site which has been wiped off the face of the internet gets archived? Maybe we need to invest in a time machine for the Internet Archive?

archive.org could archive the content and only publish it if the page has been dark for a certain amount of time.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points
*

Wait, people prefer the archived version? Too much ads?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-27 points
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

how do you expect an archive to happen if they are not allowed to archive while it is still up. How are you suposed to track changed or see how the world has shifted. This is a very narrow and in my opinion selfish way to view the world

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

how do you expect an archive to happen if they are not allowed to archive while it is still up.

I don’t want them publishing their archive while it’s up. If they archive but don’t republish while the site exists then there’s less damage.

I support the concept of archiving and screenshotting. I have my own linkwarden server set up and I use it all the time.

But I don’t republish anything that I archive because that dilutes the value of the original creator.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

About the only thing I can agree with you on here is I don’t like when people on Wikipedia archive a link and then list that as the primary source in the reference instead of the original link. Wikipedia (at least in English) has a proper method to follow for citations with links and the archived version should only become the primary if the original source is dead or has changed and no longer covers the reference.

They should also honor a DMCA takedown and robots.txt, but at least with the DMCA I’m sure there’s a backlog. Personally I’ve always appreciated the archive’s existence, though, and would think their impact is small enough that it’s better to have them than block them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
192 points

I have no sympathy for those who attack and deface our libraries, whether they be physical or digital

permalink
report
reply
89 points

The corporations that took control of the Internet don’t want us to remember.

permalink
report
reply
52 points
*

Just got an email from HaveIBeenPwned.com stating 31 million logins were leaked. Email address, username, and bcrypt hashed passwords were obtained.

Edit: probably should have read the article before posting

permalink
report
reply
34 points

Alright who has the donate link so I can help them out.

permalink
report
reply
14 points

https://archive.org/donate This would be it if it were up and running. I wonder if there’s any other avenues?

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 16K

    Monthly active users

  • 17K

    Posts

  • 720K

    Comments