Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by chrisjj | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

chrisjj

> an analysis of existing links has shown that most of its uses can be replaced.

Oh? Do tell!

View on HN

>> an analysis of existing links has shown that most of its uses can be replaced.

>Oh? Do tell!

They do. In the very next paragraph in fact:

   The guidance says editors can remove Archive.today links when the original 
   source is still online and has identical content; replace the archive link so 
   it points to a different archive site, like the Internet Archive, 
   Ghostarchive, or Megalodon; or “change the original source to something that 
   doesn’t need an archive (e.g., a source that was printed on paper)

I would be suprised if archive.today had something that was not in the wayback machine

Accounts to bypass paywalls? The audacity to do it?

Oh yeah those where a thing. As a public organization they can't really do that.

I personally just don't use websites that paywall important information.

Wayback machine removes archives upon request, so there’s definitely stuff they don’t make publicly available (they may still have it).

You don't even need to do requests if you are the owner of the URL. Robot.txt changes are applied in retrospect, which means you can disallow crawls to /abc, request a re-crawl, and all snapshots from the past which match this new rule will be removed.

Archive.today has just about everything the archived site doesn't want archived. Archive.org doesn't, because it lets sites delete archives.

Trying to search the Wayback machine almost always gives me their made-up 498 error, and when I do get a result the interface for scrolling through dates is janky at best.

I know that sometimes the behavior of each archiver service is a bit different. For example, it's possible that both Archive.today and the Internet Archive say they have a copy of a page, but then when you open up the IA version, you might see that it renders completely differently or not at all. It might be caused because the webpage has like two scrollbars, or maybe there's a redirect that happens when a link to the page is loaded. I notice this seems to happen on documentation pages that are hosted by Salesforce. It can be a bit of a pain if you want to save to save a backup copy online of a release note or something like that for everyone to easily reference in the future.

> it's possible that both Archive.today and the Internet Archive say they have a copy of a page, but then when you open up the IA version, you might see that it renders completely differently or not at all

AT archives the page as seen, even including a screenshot.

IA archives the page as loaded, then when you view hamfistedly injects its header bar and executes the source JS. As you'd expect the result is often wrecked - or tampered.

> the community should figure out how to efficiently remove links to archive.today

You're part of the community! Prove him right!

But seriously, removal is simple but replacement is not.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com