5 ms·

I mean, lots of other archive.* sites exist and do the same thing minus problematic behavior, such as archive.is, archive.oh (though maybe some are operated by

I mean, lots of other archive.* sites exist and do the same thing minus problematic behavior, such as archive.is, archive.oh (though maybe some are operated by the same individual...)

plorg 10d ago
Are any of those not run by the archive.today guy? That site has like a dozen aliases.
Cider9986 10d ago
Wikipedia links these as the mirrors. archive.today archive.fo archive.is archive.li archive.md archive.ph archive.vn archiveiya74codqgiixo33q62qlrqtkgmcitqx5u2oeqnmn5bpcbiyd.onion
topato 10d ago
Haha all of those are .today aliases. Not sure the hate over him ddosing the guy doxxing him. .today’s paywall circumvention is also why miscellaneous groups have tried to report him to the FBI over planted CSAM material, among other horrible harassment. I think we should all give him a second chance for the huge amount of time, both before and after the stupid and short lived ddos incident, that he has dedicated to archiving. His identity must be secretive, as he has already drawn the ire of many powers that be, so… I personally think the ddos incident was justified… and I’m glad my bandwidth helped in any way, frankly. Some people seem to really want to portray him as some shady evil bad guy, and after all the hit jobs against him in the past year or two, I really wonder who these anti-archive.today people actually are and what they’re motivations are (besides money).
- p91paul 10d ago
  I think the fact they are known to have changed the content of archived pages is way worse than the DDoS incident, since it makes them untrustworthy even as a source of information. Wikipedia decided to ban all archive.today (and aliases) links because of that
  - vachina 10d ago
    Do you have an example of such cases happening?
    - p91paul 10d ago
      this is from the wikipedia discussion that led to the decision of banning it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Archive.is_RFC_5#Evidence_of_altering_snapshots https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment...
      - mitxela 10d ago
        Justifiable. Just because Wikipedia has extremely strict standards doesn't mean it isn't useful for the rest of us.
mitxela 10d ago
They're all the same site.

I mean, lots of other archive.* sites exist and do the same thing minus problematic behavior, such as archive.is, archive.oh (though maybe some are operated by the same individual...)

plorg 10d ago

Are any of those not run by the archive.today guy? That site has like a dozen aliases.

Cider9986 10d ago

Wikipedia links these as the mirrors. archive.today archive.fo archive.is archive.li archive.md archive.ph archive.vn archiveiya74codqgiixo33q62qlrqtkgmcitqx5u2oeqnmn5bpcbiyd.onion

topato 10d ago

Haha all of those are .today aliases. Not sure the hate over him ddosing the guy doxxing him. .today’s paywall circumvention is also why miscellaneous groups have tried to report him to the FBI over planted CSAM material, among other horrible harassment. I think we should all give him a second chance for the huge amount of time, both before and after the stupid and short lived ddos incident, that he has dedicated to archiving. His identity must be secretive, as he has already drawn the ire of many powers that be, so… I personally think the ddos incident was justified… and I’m glad my bandwidth helped in any way, frankly. Some people seem to really want to portray him as some shady evil bad guy, and after all the hit jobs against him in the past year or two, I really wonder who these anti-archive.today people actually are and what they’re motivations are (besides money).

p91paul 10d ago
I think the fact they are known to have changed the content of archived pages is way worse than the DDoS incident, since it makes them untrustworthy even as a source of information. Wikipedia decided to ban all archive.today (and aliases) links because of that
- vachina 10d ago
  Do you have an example of such cases happening?
  - p91paul 10d ago
    this is from the wikipedia discussion that led to the decision of banning it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Archive.is_RFC_5#Evidence_of_altering_snapshots https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment...
    - mitxela 10d ago
      Justifiable. Just because Wikipedia has extremely strict standards doesn't mean it isn't useful for the rest of us.

mitxela 10d ago

They're all the same site.