HN is flooded by "archive.ph" campaign which injects Russian (and other) tracking scripts to copies of crawled 3rd party sites and requires JS to load on Firefox/Linux (and some other browsers) while pretending to be "archiving".
And it's funded by ads, so yes, it does have tracking scripts, just like a good chunk of the internet.
If you are privacy-conscious (or just don't like ads), then you can use uBlock Origin to get rid of them.
Two reasons. One is that ads probably aren't worth archiving, and removing the bloat makes the service run smoother (and it's easier to block the archive.today ads, than it is to block all those popups, random redirects, etc.).
The other is that "content producers" aren't necessarily good guys. Depriving all those clickbait manufacturers of clicks when you are hate-reading them is probably a good things.
If you guys do archiving, stop spamming HN with links that are fresh and don't need archiving, just to run your tracking on victims' devices for profit. How is it not just stealing content from other sites?
> It's fast, provides short URLs, blocks ads
> And it's funded by ads, so yes, it does have tracking scripts
So which one is it...?
It's not my website. Also, people who run it (almost certainly) owe us nothing.
> So which one is it...?
Try fetching a URL on both Internet Archive [1] and archive.today, and you'll know what I mean.
Just because a link is fresh, does not mean that it does not need archiving.
If that link is a news article that is then taken offline, or changed, it will trivially be forgotten like it never existed, and you will have no evidence to prove that ever happened.
And it very much does happen, the www of the year 2022 has gotten scarily good in forgetting and burying stuff trough SEO and delisting.
You generally browse the internet without the use of uBlock or something similar?
Guess why people don’t post web.archive.org links more? Because it’s frigging slooooow and frequently 500s itself. God forbid people flock to a more reliable service.
Fire up search on the bottom on the page and tell me what percent of "archived" sites don't require JS at all (so don't have any "pay us or fu" overlays popping up). I can tell you right now that 0% of those tracking-infested archive.ph copies of original sites work without JS on Firefox on Linux and certain other configurations.
As in: without JS, you can't see the stolen content on archive.ph while you can see it w/o JS (in most cases) under original addresses.
Most recent comment-link from 16 minutes ago:
> curl -s https://archive.ph/EHxch | grep \\.js
<script type="text/javascript" src="//go.ezoic.net/ezoic/ezoic.js"></script>
<script src="https://www.google.com/recaptcha/api.js?onload=onloadCallback&render=explicit" async defer> </script>
// .then(response => response.json());
This is your "discussion open to anyone"?
archive.ph is a tracking-infested stolen content hosting which replaces original ads for profit
Source?