• "Trustworthiness" in my question meant "reputation of b...
archive-is
·
2026-02-25
·
via 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 you constantly mentioning that Jani is a finn? This really reeks of "everyone I don't like is Hitler". Don't be ridiculous.
匿名
- First, it was not a page you saved; it was a page me saved, moreover from a social network’s webpage me controlled - so I could as well alter the original. That “reputation” is at least no worse than Reddit’s. Second, we do delete/alter pages (see the question about whistleblowers), although we try to minimize that impact. If you need stronger consistency guarantees, you should develop something on a blockchain: Arweave has done something like that. However, it would hardly be compatible with maintaining a clearnet website.
- Of course there is some CSAM, as on any user-generated content website. On Twitter, for example, or on Quora. I know this because many CSAM pages reported to us (and deleted) originate from those platforms, not from chans or .onion websites. And those are not ephemeral pages quickly uploaded and screenshotted — they have been there for years; some of them are still there.
- Tone of our texts about Jani is a parody of his texts about us: what it might look like if Jani wrote about Jani, we call him “finne” as often as he calls us “guerrilla russian jew”. And we see him (and you?) being unhappy reading that and attempting to take it down, by sending same requests to the same people at Automattic.
It is not about “political positions” at all (who cares on that shit?), it is about preparing the media landscape before sending bogus legally-looking PDFs to the critical infrastructure, just as well as my texts and the whole drama—thanks to “DDoS” promoted to media by himself—might create him problems on border crossing or when approving a loan at a bank. That’s the idea—why threaten to start involved in a scandal under your real name when you know nothing about your opponent, and in your “investigation” you cherry-pick Russian and Jewish names among others solely to include the words “russian” and “jewish” into the text (and then into friendly media, wiki article, etc)? Or to write that “the service does NOT accept crypto” just to slip “crypto” into the text, at least that way? I used to perceive Jani’s texts as merely satirical until serious media started treating them as an authoritative source; then it stopped being funny.
此内容由惯性聚合(RSS阅读器)自动聚合整理,仅供阅读参考。 原文来自 — 版权归原作者所有。