惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

量子位
博客园_首页
Google DeepMind News
Google DeepMind News
博客园 - Franky
The GitHub Blog
The GitHub Blog
GbyAI
GbyAI
有赞技术团队
有赞技术团队
Microsoft Azure Blog
Microsoft Azure Blog
G
Google Developers Blog
Recent Announcements
Recent Announcements
A
About on SuperTechFans
博客园 - 【当耐特】
博客园 - 三生石上(FineUI控件)
酷 壳 – CoolShell
酷 壳 – CoolShell
美团技术团队
罗磊的独立博客
IT之家
IT之家
博客园 - 聂微东
Stack Overflow Blog
Stack Overflow Blog
Jina AI
Jina AI
腾讯CDC
P
Proofpoint News Feed
Hugging Face - Blog
Hugging Face - Blog
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com

Archive.is blog

Archive.is blog Archive.is blog Archive.is blog Archive.is blog Archive.is blog Archive.is blog Archive.is blog Archive.is blog Archive.is blog Archive.is blog Archive.is blog • "Trustworthiness" in my question meant "reputation of being trustworthy", i.e. reputation of you not modifying saved pages to insert fake information into them. Guarantees about your archive being trustworthy are literally on the main page: > Archive.today is a time capsule for web pages! It takes a 'snapshot' of a webpage that will always be online even if the original page disappears > … > and provides a short and reliable link to an unalterable record of any web page. This was true until very recently you chose to tarnish that reputation and began inserting fake information into saved pages. • Do you think there's absolutely no illegal content on your archive, including CSAM? That's simply consequences of you refusing to remove information no matter what. I'm not saying that this approach is wrong or right, you just need to accept these consequences when someone points them out. • Is me saying that some website/company is American also "nationalism" or whatever bad political position you think it is? Or Archive.is blog Archive.is blog Archive.is blog Archive.is blog Archive.is blog Archive.is blog Archive.is blog
Archive.is blog
archive-is · 2026-02-23 · via Archive.is blog
  • Well, then let me chim in: I cancelled my weekly Liberapay donations to you in January after all of the DDoS nonsense. Why should I continue to donate to you after you've just destroyed all trustworthiness you had?

    匿名

    I guess I have already addressed this in my previous messages.

    1. The so-called “trustworthiness” never existed outside either that stock photo scam or in connection with the term “destroyed.” References to “trustworthiness” in public discussions of the archive could only arise when it was explicitly questioned. Previously—thanks to Jani Patokallio—only terms like “guerrilla” and “jews” and “FBI wanted” were used, leaving no space for a “trustworthiness” axis: the questions were floating not around whether it is “a trustworthness site or not”, but whether it is “a criminal pedo site or not”. Do you understand the difference between when say 2% are ready to believe the first thing and when 2% are ready to believe the second thing? The former can cause merely fluctuation in donations, the latter - deplatforming (and not only in tech infrastructure, think Durov story).
       
    2. While the snapshots were indeed used in civil courts, this was only possible with my written statement—not merely based on some random page online. And yes, in such stories, you are dependent on my whim—whether I choose to assist you or not, as I am under no obligation to do so.
       
    3. Do not reduce Patokallio’s activities to merely OSINT or doxxing. Publishing open or private information is not an issue at all—there is nothing inherently wrong with “information” part itself. The problem lies in the high density of buzzwords intended to provoke squeamish disdain among certain groups of readers—with quite high a coverage given the variety of those buzzwords—and in the dissemination of that propaganda in the media (and, yes, in the Wiki article, I initially missed that). It is not about publishing random names; it is about commenting on the ethnicity of each name (even that alone shifts the genre of his blog from “investigative journalism” to something else), about cherry-picking words. It is the same kind of preparation as WAAD registering the domain krimo-avocate.fr or his French child porn association. A serious existential threat to us, not comparable to the risk of losing a $2/week donor.