= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
gwern comments on Rationalist sites worth archiving? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (44)
That would already be covered by my own reading of it, my browser history being the main source of URLs for archiver-bot.
I can't believe I haven't used archiver-bots for my browsing experience until now.
I think it's like backups - you don't appreciate the need until it's gone, and then it's too late. And to be fair, I don't think I would get much value out of an archive of my web browsing history from age 10-16, say.
You're making a permanent backup of everything you ever read on the internet? That's... that's... well I suppose data storage is cheap these days. It makes perfect sense. Reading your scripting instructions now.
Not everything; I filter out things I am sure I won't want in the future and things I strongly expect to be available & which would take up a lot of space (Wikipedia in particular), and the bot is rate-limited by the IA/WebCite submissions. Increasingly more stuff is difficult to archive as sites load stuff via JS. But much of what I read, yes.