That invaluable website archive.org has a new message at the top that appeared the other day which says
"Dear Internet Archive Patrons,
We need your help to make sure the Internet Archive lasts forever. On November 9, we woke up to a new administration promising radical change."
This got me wondering about who this new administration might be and what their intentions are.
As it is such a valuable resource for information many have wanted hidden, providing a window into the past versions of many websites, would it not be a target for those wanting to delete certain information from it's archives so it would never be found by researchers?
▼ ListenUp
Hahahaha, look at you trying to corrupt archive.org...that way whatever proof might be there could be questioned. There is no mention of a "new administration".
This is what the top of the page at archive.org
"Dear Wayback Machine Patrons: You’ve come to the Wayback Machine searching for parts of the Web you may have lost. For 20 years, we’ve backed you up. Now we need your help in return. Will you help sustain this memory for the Web? The Internet Archive is a non-profit library built on trust.
Our mission: to give everyone free and universal access to all knowledge, forever. The Internet Archive has only 150 staff but runs the #250 website in the world. Reader privacy is very important to us, so we don’t sell your personal information. We don’t accept ads. But we still need to pay for servers, staff and rent. That’s where you can help. Right now a generous supporter will match your donation 1-for-1. So you can double your impact!
The key is to keep improving, and keep it free. If you find our site useful, please give what you can today. Thank you."
I use archive.org regularly to secure evidence, screen shots, links. All it takes is one person to question the authenticity and there goes any credibility. Be careful who you listen to. Discernment at every level is necessary.
▼ norobotono
Oh dear! So you are going to start stalking me and attacking me and my credibility in other threads then?
As you clearly do not know how webpages work (i.e. their content sometimes changes) then you also do not seem to understand how archive.org works, despite the fact you use it regularly. Let me demonstrate for you.
If you type archive.org into it's search bar and go back ONE DAY you will see this page -
https://web.archive.org/web/20161213000934/https://archive.org/
which does indeed state what I said it did.
So next time you want to attack me, do something you never do and actually investigate before making a claim, rather than only look at what is front of you on that day.
▼ rickjamesb____
I do not have proof, but I remember some stuff going missing from their page in last few years. For example when sensitive information about the torture report came up, a couple retracted articles got removed. The only thing really safe from deletion is a cold backup at your home.
▼ norobotono
Sure but hard drives can become corrupted and that information lost forever, so another backup site is a must for investigations and leads.
▼ rickjamesb____
True, keep in mind anything can be altered though, if it's not a decentralized p2p network.
▼ norobotono
Which is why archive.is seems a good option as it takes an image of the page rather than the formatted version.
▼ VieBleu
From what 1 commentor wrote to me, yes, but take that for what it is worth. archive.is is being recommended
▼ norobotono
Wikipedia says
"Unlike crawlers such as Wayback Machine, archive.is only captures individual pages in response to explicit user requests, and so does not obey the robots exclusion standard.[6] Because of this, website owners cannot unilaterally remove content at will, thus it is a "permanent" archive"
On the one hand this is good and allows pages to be shown that crawlers cannot find with robot.txt blocking them, but it's downside is that it only archives what people put there.
If damning pages start being removed from archive.org then there is no way to duplicate them to archive.is.
For now, people would be advised to duplicate any page found on the web or on archive.org to archive.is to be on the safe side.
▼ norobotono
But how would anyone find out about it if they have the 'right' people in place to remove certain articles. How would you ever know that page was any different before if it is now unavailable, as some pages are?
▼ GrislyAddams
Exactly right. This whole thing is reminding me of 1984 when they are changing the dictionaries and history constantly.
▼ UglyTruth
Fair to say it would be a target, but they would the risking the Streisand effect bigtime if they did and people found out about it.