The relaunch of the IT History Society (formerly the Charles Babbage Foundation) exposes a problem which the Web has brought to journalism and historians - stuff is not being preserved. There are people, however, who are trying to build proper records of the past. The question is whether this works. The IT History Society is …
The BBC news website shows contemporary stories in the links shown on older stories; it's still no super-archive though...
A related issue: is there any online archive of Google or MS "live" maps? For example, the current apps show a huge paper mill behind my house that was knocked down recently, soon to be built on, and I think an ongoing archive would be fascinating.
Censored archives are typically called "History"...
That's what "History" is all about: deleting what you don't want (or don't care about) and keeping that which supports your position.
For example, the current "revisionist" review of American history paints the founding fathers in a much less flattering (but, given contemporary corollary documents, more realistic) light. Not the "American History" I studied in school, but certainly one that makes more sense. And the set of "new facts" exposes how much material was "left out" of the previous "official" record.
Why we would expect the web to be any different is certainly puzzling.
Far be it for you to comment on how people should behave or raise their kids...
"But what sort of "history" is it which doesn't record things that would embarrass sexually or religiously crippled individuals who want to prevent their babies from growing up?"
...oh wait, you did.
May I also call massive, unnecessary straw man? This is typical Internet logic - we believe that censorship is bad (fair enough), and that people should be able to choose what they see (fair enough)....but anyone who doesn't want to look at something or doesn't want their kids to see it is "overly sensitive" or (now) "sexually or religiously crippled". What utter, complete, unfair, illogical rubbish. Stick to journalism, please.
:) Heh, I just got myself logged on our filtering system thanks to this article
Tried to go to the WayBackWhen site and it flashed up "Warning, this is blocked as an Adult site", god bless Opendns!
Now I'm off to explain this one...
What is the point in archiving such sites as Playboy.com, if the archives have no pictures on them ?
It's a valid concern
Most people think that once something is on the internet, it's there forever. As the recent cencorship and history-rewriting stories have confirmed, this is false. Future historians will curse us for this delusion.
The current news in the US is censored or just some stuff is not shown; but have a car chase in LA wow three helicopter news crews with live feeds. That get archived on 'cops' ( - bad boys bad boys ).
One case about a friend who died in a drink driving accident was on a newspaper website, she had a page under 'current news'. It was only two lines , the next day no record anywhere on the site.
Remember the old line 'Nothing lasts forever; but herpes'
- World's OLDEST human DNA found in leg bone – but that's not the only boning going on...
- Lightning strikes USB bosses: Next-gen jacks will be REVERSIBLE
- OHM MY GOD! Move over graphene, here comes '100% PERFECT' stanene
- Pics Brit inventors' GRAVITY POWERED LIGHT ships out after just 1 year
- Beijing leans on Microsoft to maintain Windows XP support