Just do not take him for your own roleplay model

There is a perception that the use of the archive by the HN community has some positive value for the archive.

But in fact:

1. HN uses a free service that someone else pays for.

2. HN abuses its paywall bypass function, which is not its main function, is not advertised (unlike 12ft).

3. HN creates legal problems for the archive by highlighting and framing the archive as a paywall-circumvention tool first.

4. HN promotes doxing.

Who would be more motivated in reducing traffic here?

> 4. HN promotes doxing.

Source:

taking this very post from flagged trash can and posting again - is definitively a such act

thetimes.com has a paywall if you visit it from the UK, and full content if you are in the US.

entonces, US-based archive.org "bypasses" this paywall as well:

https://web.archive.org/web/https://www.thetimes.com/culture...

It was already in <s>"The Simpsons"</s> "Accelerando"

Hm, a pro-Kremlin website, banned on Russian state firewall while actively used by Myrotvorets and many gov.ua sites....

How's this supposed to work? It doesn’t even make it through the Cloudflare captcha.

They use EDNS for regional compliance, not for bandwidth optimization.

What specific part of regional compliance actually needs this, and why does no other website seem to need it?

e.g. currently most media snapshots contain wartime propaganda forbidden at least somewhere.

RT content verboten in Germany, DW content verboten in Russia, not to mention another dozen of hot spots.

"Other websites" are completely inaccessible in certain regions. The Archive has stuff from all of them, so there’s basically no place on Earth where it could work without tricks like the EDNS one.

> The Archive has stuff from all of them, so there’s basically no place on Earth where it could work without tricks like the EDNS one.

Isn't that true of archive.org as well? Why doesn't it need EDNS then?

Actually, I'm not entirely sure on how archive.org achieves its resiliency.

It's a rather interesting question for archive.org, if one were to interview them, that is.

Unlike archive.today, they don't appear to have any issues with e.g. child pornography content, despite certainly hosting a hundred times more material.

They have some strong magic which makes the cheap tricks needless.

That makes zero sense. You're aware that they get the client's actual IP upon connection?

You're saying they have groups of servers with every possible permutation of censorship that they direct clients to through DNS? Absurd.

They always direct clients to a server abroad. The task is exactly opposite to what CDNs do

Did you save it?

It's accessible again now

They might need to tweak a single word. Streisand readers won’t have a clue which.

Save the page now and compare a week later.

They check for client IP. True Googlebot always comes from 66.249.*.*

Yeah I was like "surely it can't be that easy." So I went to try, and no, surely it is not.

Sometimes you can get lucky though – I know at least one forum that requires registration even just for viewing posts, but lets Googlebot through and only checks the user agent.