A Chinese state-backed institution has devised a way to identify users who send messages via Apple Inc.’s popular AirDrop feature, Beijing’s government claims, as part of broader efforts to root out undesirable content.
How odd, I’ve never had an issue with them across multiple devices and ISP’s. Have you had issues accessing them outside your home network and/or through a vpn?
On my phone it usually works, so long as I have Private DNS settings off, even through my home network using my router’s DNS settings. If I turn on the Private DNS on my phone it won’t load.
On my PC’s it’s blocked every time at home. This is using my router’s DNS, I don’t have it configured locally, so if I hop onto a WiFi with standard DNS it should work.
Archive.org is the OG, run by Internet Archives. However the downside is that you can’t just make up a link - with archive.is you can just append the URL you want and it will work (eventually, once it’s actually done its archiving) but with archive.org you have to actually go to the site and paste the URL, then you’ll see all the snapshots it has and each link has the date and time of the snapshot.
If archive.org could do something to make it easier to make links that would be perfect.
Archive.today has an extra feature where you can see radically different versions of websites from the past instead of having to hunt through archive.org’s history, not to mention the washington post doesn’t block them.
You can use another DNS service such as NextDNS (which also has a slightly better reputation than Cloudflare). The reason archive.today blocks Cloudflare and Quad9 is something something not being able to serve the best server something something, which isn’t a good enough reason but isn’t enough to quit it either.
I use Quad9 because it’s the one I want to use, and some other reasons that I decided on at the time but can’t remember (something to do with encrypting DNS).
I’m not going to change my posture because one dodgy website decided to behave in a dodgy manner. archive.today is not some charity saint acting in the public interest - that’s confusing it with archive.org/Internet Archive/The Way Back Machine. archive.today is passing off as a more respectable organisation.
Mind you, after Internet Archive fucked up with their lawsuit from book publishers, and subsequently had a judge explicitly rule that their “one copy, one share” philosophy for digital lending was illegal, they’re not great in my books either. They basically made the situation worse for everyone, meanwhile they used it as an opportunity to drum up more donations, all the while risking being shut down and everyone losing The Way Back Machine. Although, really I put most of the blame on their lawyer, who of course was the real winner in all that.
Wait, wasn’t the case about the archive giving people unlimited borrowing during COVID?
Yes. That I don’t have an issue with, although I think it was a mistake in hindsight.
The issue was trying to face the publishers head on in court, and then coming at them with a frivilous legal argument that had no hope in succeeding. They’ve done the same with their appeal - and donors have paid for both. They should have done absolutely everything they could to settle out of court.
To me using the internet archive’s interface is clunkier than archive.today’s. Maybe it’s the thumbnails, maybe it’s the loading times.
I agree, but just because archive.today is more polished doesn’t mean it’s more trustworthy or respectable.
No they did lose it, I believe. As part of the trial a judge ruled that scanning physical copies and lending out one digital copy per physical copy scanned was illegal. They were operating in a legal grey area, then as soon as they came out of that grey area they lost it. That’s why I think they should have settled out of court.
They were sued for lending unlimited copies, fought it, then ended up being told they couldn’t lend any copies without a license.
How odd, I’ve never had an issue with them across multiple devices and ISP’s. Have you had issues accessing them outside your home network and/or through a vpn?
On my phone it usually works, so long as I have Private DNS settings off, even through my home network using my router’s DNS settings. If I turn on the Private DNS on my phone it won’t load.
On my PC’s it’s blocked every time at home. This is using my router’s DNS, I don’t have it configured locally, so if I hop onto a WiFi with standard DNS it should work.
When I looked into it before I found a reddit post that mentioned it was because they actively sabotage DNS queries from Cloudflare and Quad9. Someone made a workaround but I CBA doing that, I prefer his middle finger solution (advocating for archive.org instead). https://old.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/118haqg/archiveph_webpage_archive_as_site_is/
I’ll have to check out archive.org. Thanks!
Archive.org is the OG, run by Internet Archives. However the downside is that you can’t just make up a link - with archive.is you can just append the URL you want and it will work (eventually, once it’s actually done its archiving) but with archive.org you have to actually go to the site and paste the URL, then you’ll see all the snapshots it has and each link has the date and time of the snapshot.
If archive.org could do something to make it easier to make links that would be perfect.
It’s not that hard, actually. Do something like https://web.archive.org/web/99999999999999/https://kbin.social/, note the nines.
Archive.today has an extra feature where you can see radically different versions of websites from the past instead of having to hunt through archive.org’s history, not to mention the washington post doesn’t block them.
You can use another DNS service such as NextDNS (which also has a slightly better reputation than Cloudflare). The reason archive.today blocks Cloudflare and Quad9 is something something not being able to serve the best server something something, which isn’t a good enough reason but isn’t enough to quit it either.
I use Quad9 because it’s the one I want to use, and some other reasons that I decided on at the time but can’t remember (something to do with encrypting DNS).
I’m not going to change my posture because one dodgy website decided to behave in a dodgy manner. archive.today is not some charity saint acting in the public interest - that’s confusing it with archive.org/Internet Archive/The Way Back Machine. archive.today is passing off as a more respectable organisation.
Mind you, after Internet Archive fucked up with their lawsuit from book publishers, and subsequently had a judge explicitly rule that their “one copy, one share” philosophy for digital lending was illegal, they’re not great in my books either. They basically made the situation worse for everyone, meanwhile they used it as an opportunity to drum up more donations, all the while risking being shut down and everyone losing The Way Back Machine. Although, really I put most of the blame on their lawyer, who of course was the real winner in all that.
Wait, wasn’t the case about the archive giving people unlimited borrowing during COVID?
To me using the internet archive’s interface is clunkier than archive.today’s. Maybe it’s the thumbnails, maybe it’s the loading times.
Yes. That I don’t have an issue with, although I think it was a mistake in hindsight.
The issue was trying to face the publishers head on in court, and then coming at them with a frivilous legal argument that had no hope in succeeding. They’ve done the same with their appeal - and donors have paid for both. They should have done absolutely everything they could to settle out of court.
I agree, but just because archive.today is more polished doesn’t mean it’s more trustworthy or respectable.
Ah, that makes me much calmer. I thought they also lost their right to classic library-style lending…
No they did lose it, I believe. As part of the trial a judge ruled that scanning physical copies and lending out one digital copy per physical copy scanned was illegal. They were operating in a legal grey area, then as soon as they came out of that grey area they lost it. That’s why I think they should have settled out of court.
They were sued for lending unlimited copies, fought it, then ended up being told they couldn’t lend any copies without a license.