Countless firsthand accounts of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have disappeared across the last decade, and it may speak to larger issues with the historical record in the digital age.
Meanwhile archive sites are getting sued by greedy copyright owners
… for illegally distributing copyrighted material…
I’m so tired of whiny bitches expecting everything for free
I’m so sick of whiny corporate bitches thinking they deserve $400 million payouts because some website implemented a free digital library of books they already owned so people could still borrow them during COVID when all the libraries were shut down.
Hey I totally understand why they did it, I’m just saying it’s not how the law Works around copyright, and that’s not changing until we change the law
yes but what you said in reaction to “when sites try to archive information and incredibly rich copyright holders with infinite money and lawyers sue them to the detriment of human wellbeing in order to earn a pittance more to add to their infinite dragon hoard and that’s bad” is “you’re a whiny bitch.”
perhaps it would’ve been worth considering adding your thoughts on the nuances of how laws bind vs protect people in the original comment?
No, I don’t owe it to everyone reading my comments to explain my complete thoughts on everything, people shouldn’t be out to try to change everybody’s opinions on everything all the time?
Why post an incomplete comment then if you’re too lazy lmao
incomplete =/= satiating your desires to understand where I’m coming from
Sick of parasites profiting from works made by people who died half a century ago. Can’t they do anything of value with their lives instead? Maybe something that benefits society instead of being a burden on it?
Hey I agree, but its gotta be legal. We need to change copyright law.
you sound like a whiny little bitch
Thanks for the analysis J
I’m so tired of whiny bitches expecting everything for free
Bullshit you agree.
Yes and discussing it will help this to happen
discussing it in the proper context will, I agree. defending an obvious breach of well established copyright law is not going to further the discussion however, it will stall it, and give copyright law advocates an easy target to point at when people attempt to logically discuss alternative options for intellectual property protection methods.
How else is this supposed to change when not by challenging the status quo? Or are you suggesting that it is only allowed to do so in a court of law?
Yes I am absolutely suggesting that courts of law be utilized to change the status quo… thats how all laws are changed. nobody ever rioted or looted their way into a law changing. its always done in the courts ultimately.
Rather than breaking a law, you should instead challenge the law until you change it, then you can continue your desired course. especially when that law is in regard to an intellectual property holder’s rights.
If you were an author, this had been your copyright media that was being distributed without you getting a cut of it, you wouldn’t feel like you were entitled to all of it for free.
C’mon, break the law, you know you wanna download a car 🚗
It actually doesn’t have to be legal. There’s scope to laws. If a law is out of this scope (say, regulates ideas, like copyright laws) then it’s nothing.
Aside of that, playing by your adversary’s rules was never a good idea.
Bootlicker spotted.
OMG I’m a bootlicker for wanting to respect copyright law for long enough to get rid of it, yeah ok bub, fun hot take, try again
Why are you worried about some rich corporations’ “property”… Focus on your own shit.
I will start respecting copyright law as soon as corporations start respecting “the laws” until then fuck 'em
Playing by the rules is for clowns who don’t understand the system.
I am an IP holder, does that make me a big bad corporation?
Cool… Still give zero fucks about “your” property haha
Gtfo
Be silent child
IP (authorship, protection from plagiarism as in “don’t say that what others wrote is yours, and put a reference”) is fine, copyright is not.
A specific item can be produced by a few people or one person, and ultimately their inputs add up to this 1 item, always. So it’s a finite resource possible to own.
An idea can come to any number of minds simultaneously and independently. You own what comes to your mind, but not what comes to other minds. So copyright is in fact aggression against another person, similarly to theft and coercion.
Copyright for individuals is to be respected. But corporations? Fuck them.
You’re literally on EVERY post just spewing hateful bullshit for no reason. Grow up
You should go become a Disney lawyer and increase copywrite to 1823!
If i had my way ,there would be no such thing as copyright (at least not in it’s current form in the slightest), so, I don’t think they would appreciate my stance so much… My equivalent position on trademark law also would jostle their magical britches quite a bit.
They sure seem to have no issue gathering all our data and info for free.
That’s because we allow them to, eagerly.
The whiny bitches to whom you refer clearly do not appreciate your analysis.
Thats ok, this isn’t a social credit system, voting is to represent how the community feels about statements. I can handle people not liking what i say. If getting downvoted here, somehow meant i couldn’t participate elsewhere, then maybe i would care at all, but also, i dont think I would be here if thats how it worked.
people aren’t downvoting you emotionally. they just very much disagree with the notion of an individual owning intellectual property, and the idea that copyright somehow spurs innovation instead of snuffing it.
So, in short, the whole “just someone else’s computer” thing will always come back to bite you. And of course, we’re still struggling with this. Here on the Fedi, everything is tied up on servers run by admins we know little about without much recourse to download archives or migrate, unless you’re up for full self hosting.
Except the fediverse is highly resilient in this regard, since all of the data is replicated. If an instance goes down, all of that instance’s posts are still available on every other instance.
There is that, yes. But how much control do you the user have over those caches should the original server/instance from which they were made go down? Can you easily archive or retrieve them? Edit or delete them? Do anything to further ensure their longevity? Link them back to your new social media account so that others can easily identify them as yours? Verify, in any way, that they were (or were not!) written by you as the owner of a new account?
These are all good points.
Definitely a few of the major things lacking in the Lemmy/kbin world.
theoretically one couls create a lemmyverse archive that crawls the lemmyverse and subscribes to all communities it finds and archives all federation activities that it receives
Would you even need to subscribe?
Setting up an instance should probably work, unless other instances choose to defederate from it, I guess
Instances only collect stuff from communities that have at least one subscriber on their sever.
And it looks like it may only pull new posts and comments and not old archives.
yeah pre-federation stuff would need another more complicated solution
I think it federates it if a user comments… I think. Not sure.
according to the docs if you search a comment it will federate that comment, its direct ancestors, and the post it was made on. But not all the comments for that post
Ah interesting, didn’t know that :)
Decentralized architecture is a pretty good middle-ground between centralized and distributed, though (see). Moving to a fully distributed social media – which would look something like everyone running their own servers – would carry costs and problems of its own, one of which is very few people have the time and inclination to learn how to do that and massive duplication of effort (everyone becomes responsible for creating and storing their own archives for posterity’s sake, which means lots and lots of data will just go to the bit bucket to die)
The data being shared across federated servers allows people to set up 3rd-party archives, which is beneficial, without needlessly burdening instance operators with archival work (sort of a problem for sites like MySpace, there’s nothing in it for them except maybe good PR, except digital archiving for posterity is such a niche interest there would likely be little PR benefit to doing so)
I increasingly suspect there are false dichotomies here. A user need not take full responsibility for their personal server/instance on the federation for them to truly own their data and presence. They only need to own a discrete component in the network that is easily moved and that contains their own personal information and identity. This component could just as easily be hosted on a large cloud service as it could on a bedroom Raspberry Pi, and, if truly nomadic, moved from being on one and then the other as is necessary.
It seems to me that most architectural thinking on this point fails to consider anything other than the “hardware” or server, in more or less traditional network terms, when, it seems to me, the issues concern the presentation and address-ability and mobility of the user as a discrete object.
I’ll be honest, I had forgotten MySpace was a thing back then. Every single page I went to was gaudy as hell and took forever to load on my dial up connection at the time. I’m a little surprised they’re still around. And damn, it looks a lot different!
Yea it’s a music centric site now, right?
Edit: I was curious so I looked it up. They either have 6-10 employees and 1-5M in revenue, or 523 employees and 84.2M in revenue, depending on whether you misspell ‘employees’ in the search or not (on bing).
I don’t remember the specific article I read that dove into this but it was essentially sold due to it being one of the first large data collections (user data). I’m not sure the extent its traweled now but before the social media machine took off, it was the largest if not one of the largest concentrations of actual data points to run algorithms against.
Someday historians will be reading all those emails our grandparents printed looking for cultural context.
Super interesting read, thanks for posting. (Pls don’t delete my comment)
I see this as a plus. People have a right to be forgotten. The problem nowadays is that companies track you and keep all your data forever and then use it to advertise to you.
At the very least, data collection and preservation should be explicitly opt-in.
If you really want to save something, download it yourself.
The people who live through wars, the people who die in them—soldiers, civilians, refugees—are so often invisible, so often forgotten, I’m afraid I don’t understand who it helps when their testimony disappears.
If you’re concerned about controlling your own data, getting to go back and delete your own posts on a particular website, getting companies to respect your privacy, I can respect that, but this is a situation where the words people consciously chose to share with a public audience were erased without warning, where memorials to loved ones were taken down without notice.
I agree with you that preserving what’s most important to you means taking personal steps to do, but a library’s worth of voices vanished here.
The less direct access we have to history, the harder it becomes to fact check misinformation about the past, or make informed decisions about the future.
Do not worry. History will not forget the murders American thugs comitted there.
