← Back to context Comment by bsimpson 16 hours ago It's an open secret that you can often circumvent paywalls by searching Wayback. 42 comments bsimpson Reply koolala 7 hours ago One site was doing that which archive in their name but wasn't apart of archive.org sam_lowry_ 7 hours ago archive.is or archive.today?Why being shy in the era of stealing AI? LoganDark 6 hours ago archive.today uses clients to perform DDoS, I would not recommend using their site. 4 replies → zymhan 11 hours ago Only some of them, it is not universal. ghostly_s 10 hours ago "often" gambiting 16 hours ago Every single paid article linked on HN has the way back machine link as the very first comment. ValentineC 16 hours ago The links are usually to Archive.today (aka archive.ph and a bunch of other domains), not Wayback Machine (which is run by Internet Archive). eek2121 12 hours ago Correct:Also, archive.* has actively edited archived sites to promote their agenda. Why folks continue to use them confuses me. One would think the big wikipedia purge would curb such behavior. 12 replies → petcat 15 hours ago ehh it's a distinction without a difference. The point is that alternative links are available to circumvent paid access for anyone that wants them. 17 replies →
koolala 7 hours ago One site was doing that which archive in their name but wasn't apart of archive.org sam_lowry_ 7 hours ago archive.is or archive.today?Why being shy in the era of stealing AI? LoganDark 6 hours ago archive.today uses clients to perform DDoS, I would not recommend using their site. 4 replies →
sam_lowry_ 7 hours ago archive.is or archive.today?Why being shy in the era of stealing AI? LoganDark 6 hours ago archive.today uses clients to perform DDoS, I would not recommend using their site. 4 replies →
LoganDark 6 hours ago archive.today uses clients to perform DDoS, I would not recommend using their site. 4 replies →
gambiting 16 hours ago Every single paid article linked on HN has the way back machine link as the very first comment. ValentineC 16 hours ago The links are usually to Archive.today (aka archive.ph and a bunch of other domains), not Wayback Machine (which is run by Internet Archive). eek2121 12 hours ago Correct:Also, archive.* has actively edited archived sites to promote their agenda. Why folks continue to use them confuses me. One would think the big wikipedia purge would curb such behavior. 12 replies → petcat 15 hours ago ehh it's a distinction without a difference. The point is that alternative links are available to circumvent paid access for anyone that wants them. 17 replies →
ValentineC 16 hours ago The links are usually to Archive.today (aka archive.ph and a bunch of other domains), not Wayback Machine (which is run by Internet Archive). eek2121 12 hours ago Correct:Also, archive.* has actively edited archived sites to promote their agenda. Why folks continue to use them confuses me. One would think the big wikipedia purge would curb such behavior. 12 replies → petcat 15 hours ago ehh it's a distinction without a difference. The point is that alternative links are available to circumvent paid access for anyone that wants them. 17 replies →
eek2121 12 hours ago Correct:Also, archive.* has actively edited archived sites to promote their agenda. Why folks continue to use them confuses me. One would think the big wikipedia purge would curb such behavior. 12 replies →
petcat 15 hours ago ehh it's a distinction without a difference. The point is that alternative links are available to circumvent paid access for anyone that wants them. 17 replies →
One site was doing that which archive in their name but wasn't apart of archive.org
archive.is or archive.today?
Why being shy in the era of stealing AI?
archive.today uses clients to perform DDoS, I would not recommend using their site.
4 replies →
Only some of them, it is not universal.
"often"
Every single paid article linked on HN has the way back machine link as the very first comment.
The links are usually to Archive.today (aka archive.ph and a bunch of other domains), not Wayback Machine (which is run by Internet Archive).
Correct:Also, archive.* has actively edited archived sites to promote their agenda. Why folks continue to use them confuses me. One would think the big wikipedia purge would curb such behavior.
12 replies →
ehh it's a distinction without a difference. The point is that alternative links are available to circumvent paid access for anyone that wants them.
17 replies →