points by kragen 1 day ago | 0 comments
Disappointing but not that surprising; it's been banned from Wikipedia for months because it was enlisting viewers' computers in a DDoS against an investigative journalist for trying to figure out who was behind it. But it's the only way I've found to access a lot of information that is otherwise lost. So, what do we do?
[–] sfoley 1 day ago
Weren't they also caught modifying their "archived" content?
[–] danso 1 day ago
That's been my nagging fear about them too. Obviously it's not an option they'd want to exercise frequently, but it could be devastating to individual targets.
(ofc this is a risk with the Wayback Machine, who also has a policy for honoring takedown request. But the Internet Archive's board and executives are known people with reputations)
[–] throw0101c 1 day ago
On modifying bits, see perhaps this comment from a discussion ~8 months ago:
* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47092006#47100204
* https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/02/wikipedia-bans-a...
[–] mahboi 1 day ago
Hm, someone in the first thread mentioned a Reddit cofounder did something like this too
[–] iamnothere 1 day ago
Yes, and archiving as a practice became popular when people noticed that media sites were beginning to edit or delete articles without listing a correction, sometimes after the story had already circulated widely. Previously, editors would usually make a note of such things.
(This is why archives that bypass paywalls are particularly important. I wish we had more options here.)
[–] kvemkon 1 day ago
> investigative journalist
I think there is a confusion of blogger with a registered journalist, who must follow journalist's (ethic) rules.
[–] kragen 9 hours ago
In countries with freedom of the press, the distinction you're talking about doesn't exist.
[–] humodz 1 day ago