all 7 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 24 points 1 year ago (2 children)

They were bound to come after the archive sites at some point, because they allow people to see information the Trump government has deleted. We need a distributed, resilient archive, but the storage requirements are huge.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    It would be cool if there was some technology similar to BitTorrent that allows people to seed a large archive but based on whatever storage they’re able to contribute instead of the whole file.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    There have been internet distributed file systems, but they tend to be very slow, availability can be patchy, and the capacity ordinary users could contribute wouldn't be anywhere near enough for an internet archive.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] [S] 11 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Infamous among companies running paywalled websites! ;)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    I mean I have no real problem with paywalls, the people who run the thing have to pay their people somehow else the whole landscape will just be propaganda that someone is willing to subsidize. But at the same time I won't say that archive.is is some kind of awful malicious horrible-man.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago
    107 comments in c/technology@lemmy.world view that post
    5 comments in c/technology@lemmy.zip view that post
    5 comments in c/usa@lemmy.ml view that post
    3 comments in c/usa@midwest.social view that post
    1 comment in c/404media@ibbit.at view that post