That's pretty interesting. It looks like they define inaccessible links as urls that get a 404 or the server doesn't resolve.
I wonder if there are any real implications of this. We seem to know it and work around it in some cases, e.g. StackOverflow saying answers need to contain quotes from pages they reference.
For some real-world examples of this issue, you can look at how the only reason we have any of the early BBC news reels and TV shows is because of copies recorded by people on their TVs. The BBC reused the tapes that they recorded on for new programming to save money on buying tapes. When they started to think about the preservation of news and shows like Dr. Who, they had to turn to the general public and ask them to donate any recordings that they might have made.
It's estimated that more than 50% of all video games are lost forever because companies didn't care to save a master copy, and this has already come back to bite some of these companies in the ass with the recent trend of remakes and remasters. There was a recent remake of one of the GTA games from the early 2000s that was very poorly received, and it turned out that the company who worked on it only had the mobile phone port of the game to work with because Rockstar hadn't bothered to keep a master copy of the game. There was another recent remake of a game that was very obviously done using a pirated copy of the game as the source, because they hadn't even bothered to remove the cracker's logo from the game.
With examples like that and Sony recently removing thousands of people's access to music and movies that they bought on basically a whim, it's pretty clear that preservation efforts will be done in spite of companies rather than helped by them. And so that means copies of things will be one random harddrive failure of some single person on the internet away from disappearing forever.
I've nothing really to add but the gta game was San Andreas and Take Two replaced the already functional ports with the mobile version so all that's available now is the shitey mobile version. I own/owned it on PS4/5 and PC and now I don't play it at all because if I redownload it I'm getting the mobile version.
The difference is that most of that content lasted for at least a few decades, if not centuries before being lost to time. As content on the internet is 'destroyed' if no one hosts it any more, a lot of valuable content is being lost in just a few years after being created. Archiving needs to be more widespread and better supported if the resources and culture of the internet as it has evolved over time are to be preserved for posterity.
Some government should finally grow the balls to reform copyright, it's insane that basically the whole world uses this broken system that, among other things, makes archiving illegal
The thing is, we can do better, it is not a technological problem as during the analogue/paper age with chemical degradation, it is a societal and legal issue.
It's a technological and a physical issue. We just can't store every bit of information plus a picture of everyone's cat. We can't guarantee that no information ever gets lost. We've also not really stored and archived every shopping list, advertising, pamphlet, silly poem, ugly drawing etc. since the time of the printing press and that's okay.
It might be a good idea to store and archive some written material as time passes but we want to be a bit picky about what we store. That said, I wouldn't mind to find more shopping lists and less posh documents in museums.
You are trying to reach neo. Please select all the pictures with crosswalks. In order to contact an AI agent instead, you must agree to our data policy.
That's an exaggeration. We had nice things back then with forums and ICQ\AIM\others, which we don't have now, but the tech allows us to have them. It's the society that has degraded.
The technology is working against it too. App search engines are just spam ads now and will never find that niche forum that has what you are looking for, like they once did 20 years ago.
I think a lot of stuff got adjusted when mobile became a thing.
Instant message apps just got replaced with Whatsapp, Signal, etc.
Monetisation is a huge problem. Nobody ever expected to make money off a wonky old webpage they made in HoTMetaL, or a MySpace page. Now everyone is on homogenised platforms, they're quite happy to accept bucketloads of money to project whatever you have to say to the masses, and none of it is good. All the hate you see out there isn't society. It's money.
Instant message apps just got replaced with Whatsapp, Signal, etc.
Alternately, Whatsapp, Signal, etc... are instant message apps. I'm a little surprised none of the messaging apps that had been popular on PCs managed to stay popular on mobile.
This is the main thing that happened, I think. I met some old friends recently I hadn't seen in a while and it's wild how differently we engage with the internet. My main source of interaction is on a laptop, and even then a non-trivial amount of my web interaction is purely via the terminal. Of all of my friends, one of them had a PC, and they don't use it. Their engagement with the internet is purely on mobile devices. I was dumbfounded. Like...how do you do stuff on a phone. I hate phones. They're so much worse than a good keyboard. But I also hate the current version of the internet and they seem to love it.
And that, I think, is the core difference. It's not that the phones took over, it's that the keyboard died for the average user. A keyboard allows a complex degree of engagement that is difficult, if not truly impossible, to match on a device meant for short bursts of canned responses and auto-complete suggestions. It forces individually brief, but ultimately continuous pre-programmed engagement.
And that's the entirety of the modern internet. It's why tiktok is so popular. It's why youtube shoves Shorts down your throat when you visit. It's why Twitter took off. It's also why a website like reddit, that was based initially around the kind of engagement I like, is so hard to monetize and why the attempts at dumbing it down and strangling it of anything that isn't that same kind of superficial engagement (and by God are they trying) is so difficult for the website's leadership: because all the other places that are more profitable than it are designed to do that from the jump, and they have to superimpose that strategy onto a content aggregator whose main attraction was a robust, nested comment system.
I keep thinking about what was, for me, the Golden Age of the internet. I know it's different for everyone, but from around, I guess, 2009 to 2017 I was online a lot. And a lot of what the internet was and how it operated and the ideas there, especially on reddit, were so formative to who I am. And I keep feeling like I never appreciated it or really thought about how vibrant and interesting it was while it was like that. It feels like when you're a kid and you see a wave for the first time, and it's building and building and it seems like it'll be building forever, getting bigger and bigger, but then suddenly it collapses under its own weight and is gone as if it were never there, and after the fact you just wish you'd appreciated it for the wonder it was in that moment. Part of it's just getting older and the general feeling of nostalgia that comes with age, but sometimes that nostalgia is justified.
All the hate you see out there isn’t society. It’s money.
I know, right? No matter how rude I am on one forum I still frequent, or in a groupchat of friends, or in family chat, it just dissolves because everybody wants to understand each other. In "global" social media it's some PvP, as if people didn't have boxing pears to vent their frustration there.
Forums are still around. People just got lazy and started using reddit instead. Search engines are also to blame since they don't bring up smaller forums in search results. People can go back to forums if they want.
That's the point. One can think what they want, decide and go there. Or one can just leave their home and walk with the crowd wherever it brings them. (A metaphor.)
Social media make it appear like you could live a life like the latter. Doing all things you need. Just walk with the crowd and never decide.
People are afraid of even the tiny bits of freedom, when they are looking at it from that human stream which never leaves them. They think that outside of it, if a decision they make is wrong, they are lost.
It's psychological, all of it, like a very subtle and less deadly slaughtering block.
