That's doubtful. This "panopticon" version of the future is in direct competition with the increasing sophistication of deep fakes and other means of generating content. Instead of everything you've ever done being easily searchable, verified to be you, and there to shame you forever, another view of where we're headed is to where all content from the past is subject to doubts and questions of authenticity. To me, the latter scenario seems likelier to occur.

You don’t avoid 1984 (mass surveillance) by being 1984 (erasing history).

Edit: to expand my thought, what you just said would be erased if we got in the habit of erasing stuff because it might be unpleasant. So while maybe this kind of opposition to Internet Archive would get rid of it, good luck preserving your well intentioned reason for it far into the future. A world in which books are burned/rewritten is a world in which it’s impossible to give a shit about anything on a societal level, including privacy.

Have you ever tried to find the things you said on a forum when you were a teenager?

Every time I do this, most of the stuff I did 20 years ago is outright gone, and it always ends in disappointment-- and I have material info on where and what it should be.

> That stupid shit you said in some obscure forum when you were a teenager

What's the first presidential election going to be like when the first candidate who was old enough to have a Facebook or myspace runs for election? Each opponent will do anything they can do disparage the 35+ year olds character with the words he uttered as a teenager.

I think one of the unintentional consequences of this newspaper move will be that a great deal of our history will be lost. When I was a kid, the libraries touted how cool it was to peruse old stories in the local paper on microfiche. Now that info is online for $8 per article.

That's not how llms work.