this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2023
198 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37747 readers
181 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This is something that keeps me worried at night. Unlike other historical artefacts like pottery, vellum writing, or stone tablets, information on the Internet can just blink into nonexistence when the server hosting it goes offline. This makes it difficult for future anthropologists who want to study our history and document the different Internet epochs. For my part, I always try to send any news article I see to an archival site (like archive.ph) to help collectively preserve our present so it can still be seen by others in the future.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] strainedl0ve@beehaw.org 29 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This is a very good point and one that is not discussed enough. Archive.org is doing amazing work but there is absolutely not enough of that and they have very limited resources.

The whole internet is extremely ephemeral, more than people realize, and it's concerning in my opinion. Funny enough, I actually think that federation/decentralization might be the solution. A distributed system to back-up the internet that anyone can contribute storage and bandwidth to might be the only sustainable solution. I wonder.if anyone has thought about it already.

[–] entropicdrift@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 1 year ago

I'd argue that it can help or hurt to decentralize, depending on how it's handled. If most sites are caching/backing up data that's found elsewhere, that's both good for resilience and for preservation, but if the data in question is centralized by its home server, then instead of backing up one site we're stuck backing up a thousand, not to mention the potential issues with discovery

[–] Los@beehaw.org 25 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
[–] RealAccountNameHere@beehaw.org 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I worry about this too. I've always said and thought that I feel more like a citizen of the Internet then of my country, state, or town, so its history is important to me.

[–] Gork@beehaw.org 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yeah and unless someone has the exact knowledge of what hard drive to look for in a server rack somewhere, tracing an individual site's contents that went 404 is practically impossible.

I wonder though if Cloud applications would be more robust than individual websites since they tend to be managed by larger organizations (AWS, Azure, etc).

Maybe we need a Svalbard Seed Vault extension just to house gigantic redundant RAID arrays. 😄

[–] jmp242@sopuli.xyz 9 points 1 year ago

We're actually well beyond RAID arrays. Google CEPH. It's actually both super complicated and kind of simple to grow to really large storage amounts with LOTS of redundancy. It's trickier for global scale redundancy, I think you'd need multiple clusters using something else to sync them.

I also always come back to some of the stuff freenet used to do in older versions where everyone who was a client also contributed disk space that was opaque to them, but kept a copy of what you went and looked at, and what you relayed via it for others. The more people looking at content, the more copies you ended up with in the system, and it would only lose data if no one was interested in it for some period of time.

[–] RealAccountNameHere@beehaw.org 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This isn't directly related to your comment, but you seem so smart, and I got to say that is definitely one thing I'm enjoying on this website over Reddit! :-)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Otome-chan@kbin.social 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is why stuff like the internet archive exist: to try and preserve this content. The problem is that governments are trying to shut down the internet archive...

[–] Maeve@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] Otome-chan@kbin.social 19 points 1 year ago (2 children)

IA blog. There's an ongoing court case. What has happened is that IA has a digital book lending service. Typically they restrict loaning to 1-user per physical book, which is the norm for digital book lending. However, at one point during the pandemic, IA did a "crisis library" event for a day or two in which they allowed infinitely many people to download/loan a book despite only having one or two copies. Publishers who own the copyright on those books then pursued a copyright violation case against IA, which has now put the entire library in jeopardy.

Theoretically, this case should only affect the digital book lending side of their library, but it may end up shutting down their service and library as a whole depending on how the court case goes. There's been a lot of efforts by companies and governments to shut down IA, so they'd always been very cautious about their operations.

IA's big legal issues stem from their novel 'web archive', and their digital book lending. They've also been host to roms of old software/games that may still fall under copyright. Philosophically, IMO IA did nothing wrong. However, their crisis library event did violate copyright law which kinda put them under the microscope.

Theoretically the web archive service and general digital archives of old public domain content should be safe. But we'll have to see how things go.

[–] AnonStoleMyPants@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 year ago

This is an annoying event that happened. I don't like that the copyright works in this way but fuck man, IA had to know that what they were doing was not even remotely in the grey area. It was a dumb move from them.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] realChem@beehaw.org 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Probably referencing this lawsuit the the internet archive lost recently, related to the online library they launched during the pandemic.

[–] Otome-chan@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

oh did the court stuff pass already? I haven't kept up.

[–] fenfalca@lemmy.one 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Remember a few years ago when MySpace did a faceplant during a server migration, and lost literally every single piece of music that had ever been uploaded? It was one of the single-largest losses of Internet history and it's just... not talked about at all anymore.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] xray@beehaw.org 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Yeah it’s funny how I always got warned about how “the internet is forever” when it comes to being care about what you post on social media, which isn’t bad advice and is kinda true, but also really kinda not true. So many things I’ve wanted to find on the internet that I experienced like 5-15 years ago are just gone without a trace.

[–] buckykat@lemmy.fmhy.ml 13 points 1 year ago

Things you want to disappear will last forever but things you want to keep will vanish

[–] parrot-party@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago

It should be revised to "the Internet can be forever". There's no control over what persists and what doesn't, but some things really do get copied everywhere and live on in infamy.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] thejml@lemm.ee 15 points 1 year ago (3 children)

It’s important here to think about a few large issues with this data.

First Data Storage. Other people in here are talking about decentralizing and creating fully redundant arrays so multiple copies are always online and can be easily migrated from one storage tech to the next. There’s a lot of work here not just in getting all the data, but making sure it continues to move forward as we develop new technologies and new storage techniques. This won’t be a cheap endeavor, but it’s one we should try to keep up with. Hard drives die, bit rot happens. Even off, a spinning drive will fail, as will an SSD with time. CD’s I’ve written 15+ years ago aren’t 100% readable.

Second, there’s data organization. How can you find what you want later when all you have are images of systems, backups of databases, static flat files of websites? A lot of sites now require JavaScript and other browser operations to be able to view/use the site. You’ll just have a flat file with a bunch of rendered HTML, can you really still find the one you want? Search boxes wont work, API calls will fail without the real site up and running. Databases have to be restored to be queried and if they’re relational, who will know how to connect those dots?

Third, formats. Sort of like the previous, but what happens when JPG is deprecated in favor of something better? Can you currently open up that file you wrote in 1985? Will there still be a program available to decode it? We’ll have to back those up as well… along with the OSes that they run on. And if there’s no processors left that can run on, we’ll need emulators. Obviously standards are great here, we may not forget how to read a PCX or GIF or JPG file for a while, but more niche things will definitely fall by the wayside.

Fourth, Timescale. Can we keep this stuff for 50 yrs? 100 yrs? 1000 yrs? What happens when our great*30-grand-children want to find this info. We regularly find things from a few thousand years ago here on earth with archeological digsites and such. There’s a difference between backing something up for use in a few months, and for use in a few years, what about a few hundred or thousand? Data storage will be vastly different, as will processors and displays and such. … Or what happens in a Horizon Zero Dawn scenario where all the secrets are locked up in a vault of technology left to rot that no one knows how to use because we’ve nuked ourselves into regression.

[–] digitallyfree@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Rentlar@beehaw.org 14 points 1 year ago

Well stone tablets, writing, songs, culture can disappear with time, either naturally (such as erosion and weather) or through human action (such burning books, destructive investigation of ancient artifacts/ruins)

That's why we try to keep good records.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Isn't that like a lot of older television shows? Lots of shows are lost as no one wanted to pay for tape storage.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] altz3r0@beehaw.org 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

I think preservation is happening, the issue lies in accessibility. Projects like Archive.org are the public ones, but it is certain that private organizations are doing the same, just not making it public.

This is also something that is my biggest worry about the Fediverse. It has tools to deal with it, but they are self-contained. No search engine is crawling the Fediverse as far as I've looked, and no initiative to archive, index and overall make the content of the Fediverse accessible is currently in place, and that's a big risk. I'm sure we will soon be seeing loss of information for this reason, if not already happened.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] kool_newt@beehaw.org 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Capitalism has no interest in preservation except where it is profitable. Thinking about the long-term future, archaeologist's success and acting on it is not profitiable.

[–] FuckFashMods@lib.lgbt 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Its not just capitalism lol

Preserving things costs money/resources/time. This happens in a lot of societies.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] aard@kyu.de 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Another problem is that even if sites and their content stay up they often reorganize it for various reasons - often by importing old content into some new platform - and don't care about the URLs the content is available at. Which breaks all links to it.

Some pages at least try to show you a page with suggestions what you might've been going for, but I've also seen those less and less over the years.

For my stuff I've been making sure to keep links working for over two decades now - on my personal page you can still access everything similary to /cgi-bin/script.cgi?page even though that script and the cgi-bin directory as a whole has been gone for over a decade. But I seem to be pretty alone in efforts trying to keep things at stable locations.

edit: I just noticed matrix.org broke all links coming from google search at least for bridges. They should've known better.

[–] Schrottkatze@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A friend of mine talked about data preservation in the internet in a blog post, which I consider to be a good read. Sure, there's a lot lost, but as he sais in the blog post, that's mostly gonna be trash content, the good stuff is generally comparatively well archived as people care about it.

[–] distractionfactory@beehaw.org 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That is likely true for a majority of "the good stuff", but making that determination can be tricky. Let's consider spam emails. In our daily lives they are useless, unwanted trash. However, it's hard to know what a future historian might be able to glean from a complete record of all spam in the world over the span of a decade. They could analyze it for social trends, countries of origin, correlation with major global events, the creation and destruction of world governments. Sometimes the garbage of the day becomes a gold mine of source material that new conclusions can be drawn from many decades down the road.

I'm not proposing that we should preserve all that junk, it's junk, without a doubt. But asking a person today what's going to be valuable to society tomorrow is not always possible.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DeGandalf@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

In this aspect, the internet is closer to spoken language, than any written media. Even if you use a service to archive the things you find, it's still possible, that they shut down, too.

[–] CynAq@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

We need deliberate efforts to archive everything efficiently.

We also need a way to decouple everyone's personal info from publicly available information about them, keeping in mind that not all publicly available information is intended to be that way.

Storage ain't cheap and it definitely ain't infinite.

This is a way harder problem than "the internet" being a bit more mindful can solve easily.

Not to absolve any companies from responsibility or anything.

[–] CynAq@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We need deliberate efforts to archive everything efficiently.

We also need a way to decouple everyone's personal info from publicly available information about them, keeping in mind that not all publicly available information is intended to be that way.

Storage ain't cheap and it definitely ain't infinite.

This is a way harder problem than "the internet" being a bit more mindful can solve easily.

Not to absolve any companies from responsibility or anything.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] VeeSilverball@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

I've had some thoughts on, essentially, doing more of what historically worked; a mix of "archival quality materials" and "incentives for enthusiasts". If we only focus on accumulating data like IA does, it is valuable, but we soak up a lot of spam in the process, and that creates some overwhelming costs.

The materials aspect generally means pushing for lower fidelity, uncomplicated formats, but this runs up against what I call the "terrarium problem": to preserve a precious rare flower exactly as is, you can't just take a picture, you have to package up the entire jungle. Like, we have emulators for old computing platforms, and they work, but someone has to maintain them, and if you wanted to write something new for those platforms, you are most likely dealing with a "rest of the software ecosystem" that is decades out of date. So I believe there's an element to that of encoding valuable information in such a way that it can be meaningful without requiring the jungle - e.g. viewing text outside of its original presentation. That tracks with humanity's oldest stories and how they contain some facts that survived generations of retellings.

The incentives part is tricky. I am crypto and NFT adjacent, and use this identity to participate in that unabashedly. But my view on what it's good for has shifted from the market framing towards examination of historical art markets, curation and communal memory. Having a story be retold is our primary way of preserving it - and putting information on-chain(like, actually on-chain. The state of the art in this can secure a few megabytes) creates a long-term incentive for the chain to "retell its stories" as a way of justifying its valuation. It's the same reason as why museums are more than "boring old stuff".

When you go to a museum you're experiencing a combination of incentives: the circumstances that built the collection, the business behind exhibiting it to the public, and the careers of the staff and curators. A blockchain's data is a huge collection - essentially a museum in the making, with the market element as a social construct that incentivizes preservation. So I believe archival is a thing blockchains could be very good at, given the right framing. If you like something and want it to stay around, that's a medium that will be happy to take payment to do so.

[–] lloram239@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Ultimately this is a problem that’s never going away until we replace URLs. The HTTP approach to find documents by URL, i.e. server/path, is fundamentally brittle. Doesn’t matter how careful you are, doesn’t matter how much best practice you follow, that URL is going to be dead in a few years. The problem is made worse by DNS, which in turn makes URLs expensive and expire.

There are approaches like IPFS, which uses content-based addressing (i.e. fancy file hashes), but that’s note enough either, as it provide no good way to update a resource.

The best™ solution would be some kind of global blockchain thing that keeps record of what people publish, giving each document a unique id, hash, and some way to update that resource in a non-destructive way (i.e. the version history is preserved). Hosting itself would still need to be done by other parties, but a global log file that lists out all the stuff humans have published would make it much easier and reliable to mirror it.

The end result should be “Internet as globally distributed immutable data structure”.

Bit frustrating that this whole problem isn’t getting the attention it deserves. And that even relatively new projects like the Fediverse aren't putting in the extra effort to at least address it locally.

[–] lucien@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I don't think this will ever happen. The web is more than a network of changing documents. It's a network of portals into systems which change state based on who is looking at them and what they do.

In order for something like this to work, you'd need to determine what the "official" view of any given document is, but the reality is that most documents are generated on the spot from many sources of data. And they aren't just generated on the spot, they're Turing complete documents which change themselves over time.

It's a bit of a quantum problem - you can't perfectly store a document while also allowing it to change, and the change in many cases is what gives it value.

Snapshots, distributed storage, and change feeds only work for static documents. Archive.org does this, and while you could probably improve the fidelity or efficiency, you won't be able to change the underlying nature of what it is storing.

If all of reddit were deleted, it would definitely be useful to have a publically archived snapshot of Reddit. Doing so is definitely possible, particularly if they decide to cooperate with archival efforts. On the other hand, you can't preserve all of the value by simply making a snapshot of the static content available.

All that said, if we limit ourselves to static documents, you still need to convince everyone to take part. That takes time and money away from productive pursuits such as actually creating content, to solve something which honestly doesn't matter to the creator. It's a solution to a problem which solely affects people accessing information after those who created it are no longer in a position to care about said information, with deep tradeoffs in efficiency, accessibility, and cost at the time of creation. You'd never get enough people to agree to it that it would make a difference.

[–] lloram239@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

but the reality is that most documents are generated on the spot from many sources of data.

That's only true due to the way the current Web (d)evolved into a bunch of apps rendered in HTML. But there is fundamentally no reason why it should be that way. The actual data that drives the Web is mostly completely static. The videos Youtube has on their server don't change. The post on Reddit very rarely change. Twitter posts don't change either. The dynamic parts of the Web are the UI and the ads, they might change on each and every access, or be different for different users, but they aren't the parts you want to link to anyway, you want to link to a specific users comment, not a specific users comment rendered in a specific version of the Reddit UI with whatever ads were on display that day.

Usenet did that (almost) correct 40 years ago, each message got an message-id, each message replying to that message would contain that id in a header. This is why large chunks of Usenet could be restored from tape archives and put be back together. The way content linked to each other didn't depend on a storage location. It wasn't perfect of course, it had no cryptography going on and depended completely on users behaving nicely.

Doing so is definitely possible, particularly if they decide to cooperate with archival efforts.

No, that's the problem with URLs. This is not possible. The domain reddit.com belongs to a company and they control what gets shown when you access it. You can make your own reddit-archive.org, but that's not going to fix the millions of links that point to reddit.com and are now all 404.

All that said, if we limit ourselves to static documents, you still need to convince everyone to take part.

The software world operates in large part on Git, which already does most of this. What's missing there is some kind of DHT to automatically lookup content. It's also not an all or nothing, take the Fediverse, the idea of distributing content is already there, but the URLs are garbage, like:

https://beehaw.org/comment/291402

What's 291402? Why is the id 854874 when accessing the same post through feddit.de? Those are storage locations implementation details leaking out into the public. That really shouldn't happen, that should be a globally unique content hash or a UUID.

When you have a real content hash you can do fun stuff, in IPFS URLs for example:

https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmR7GSQM93Cx5eAg6a6yRzNde1FQv7uL6X1o4k7zrJa3LX/ipfs.draft3.pdf

The /ipfs/QmR7GSQM93Cx5eAg6a6yRzNde1FQv7uL6X1o4k7zrJa3LX/ipfs.draft3.pdf part is server independent, you can access the same document via:

https://dweb.link/ipfs/QmR7GSQM93Cx5eAg6a6yRzNde1FQv7uL6X1o4k7zrJa3LX/ipfs.draft3.pdf

or even just view it on your local machine directly via the filesystem, without manually downloading:

$ acrobat /ipfs/QmR7GSQM93Cx5eAg6a6yRzNde1FQv7uL6X1o4k7zrJa3LX/ipfs.draft3.pdf

There are a whole lot of possibilities that open up when you have better names for content, having links on the Web that don't go 404 is just the start.

[–] soiling@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

re: static content

How does authentication factor into this? even if we exclude marketing/tracking bullshit, there is a very real concern on many sites about people seeing the data they're allowed to see. There are even legal requirements. If that data (such as health records) is statically held in a blockchain such that anyone can access it by its hash, privacy evaporates, doesn't it?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] LewsTherinTelescope@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Inability to edit or delete anything also fundamentally has a lot of problems on its own. Accidentally post a picture with a piece of mail in the background and catch it a second after sending? Too late, anyone who looks now has your home address. Child shares too much online and parent wants to undo that? No can do, it's there forever now. Post a link and later learn it was misinformation and want to take it down? Sucks to be you, or anyone else that sees it. Your ex post revenge porn? Just gotta live with it for the rest of time.

There's always a risk of that when posting anything online, but that doesn't mean systems should be designed to lean into that by default.

[–] Corhen@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

even beyond what you said, even if we had a global blockchain based browsing system, that wouldnt make it easier to keep the content ONLINE. If a website goes offline, the knowledge and reference is still lost, and whether its a URL or a blockchain, it would still point towards a dead resource.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Hedup@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't think it's a problem. If everything or most of internet would be somehow preserved, future antropologists would have explonentially more material to go through, which will be impossible. Unless the number of antropologists grows exponentially, similarily how internet does. But then there's a problem, if the amount of antropologists grow exponentially, it's beceause the overall human population grows exponentially. If human population grows exponentially, then also its produced content on internet grows even more exponentialier.

You see, the content on the internet will always grow faster than the discipline of antropology. And it's nothing new - think about all the lost "history" that was not preserved and we don't know about. The good news is that the most important things will be preserved naturally.

[–] soiling@beehaw.org 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

the most important things will be preserved naturally.

I believe this is a fallacy. Things get preserved haphazardly or randomly, and "importance" is relative anyway.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] CherryClan@beehaw.org 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

during the twitter exodus my friend was fretting over not being able to access a beloved twitter account's tweets and wanting to save them somehow. I told her if she printed them all on acid free paper she had a better chance of being able to access them in the future than trying to save them digitally

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Optical disks are also pretty good too. You can even buy special ceramic ones that shouldn't degrade over centuries or millennia.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] archon@dataterm.digital 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Long ago the saying was "be careful - anything you post on the internet is forever". Well, time has certainly proven that to be false.

There's things like /r/datahoarder (not sure if they have a new community here) that run their own petabyte storage archiving projects, some people are doing their part.

[–] jeena@jemmy.jeena.net 3 points 1 year ago

For my own stuff I try really hard to host it myself and the oldest still surviving thing is from 2003 and it's still online https://paradies.jeena.net/artikel/webdesign

load more comments
view more: next ›