Internet Archive Setting Up Shop in Canada to Avoid Trump

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Internet Archive Setting Up Shop in Canada to Avoid Trump

Postby seemslikeadream » Sun Jan 01, 2017 11:02 am

for members that take offense to posting whole articles here please understand

So the idea of having multiple copies keeps stuff safe
-BREWSTER KAHLE

INVESTIGATIONS
Internet Archive Setting Up Shop in Canada to Avoid Facing Persecution from Trump
The founder of the Internet Archive, Brewster Kahle, explains why.
By Amy Goodman / Democracy Now! December 29, 2016

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIb0KsGO4pg

In the wake of Trump’s election, the Internet Archive has announced it will be moving a copy of its archive to Canada. The archive is one of the world’s largest public digital libraries. Part of the site includes the Wayback Machine, which preserves old websites, allowing researchers to access pages deleted by politicians and others. We speak to the founder of the Internet Archive, Brewster Kahle.



This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to bring Brewster Kahle into this conversation, founder of the Internet Archive, which is such an important public resource, I mean, everything to the Wayback Machine, where you can find the previous iterations of websites. You, every presidential term that’s over, have been running the End of Term Archive to archive, ensure that what’s—the information of a presidential administration is preserved when it changes over, like we see from Obama to Trump. But what about Obama to Trump? Do you see a special threat now when it comes to preserving information?

BREWSTER KAHLE: This administration, or upcoming administration, has promised radical change, even potentially canceling whole departments. So the services that those departments have traditionally served are now online and could be deleted, changed, modified in ways that we really don’t know what’s coming up. So, where we’ve always gone and preserved paper records, which is—provides some level of preservation, these digital is a new—new aspect. And it goes much beyond, just like the previous speaker just said, beyond just recording webpages. We need the whole databases and the structures that science now depends on. But it’s now within an administration that we’re really not sure what’s coming up.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: And, Brewster Kahle, could you explain what exactly happens when there’s a change in administration? Your End of Term Archive keeps all of the information that was previously in a particular administration’s website, but what exactly changes? Is everything from dot-gov sites removed?

BREWSTER KAHLE: Things like the whole WhiteHouse.gov site, of course, just disappears. And so, anybody accessing any of the press releases or any of the information that used to be on that will get broken links. There are—some of the browser manufacturers are starting to point to the Wayback Machine, which we encourage, to be able to continue to find information that used to be on those sites. But it’s now beyond just that. It’s also social media feeds that can be manipulated and changed retroactively, which is done all the time now by a very media-savvy upcoming administration. So, I think we will see more control of the message, especially through the digital channels, and that makes archives, libraries and permanent access even more important.

AMY GOODMAN: Explain what the Wayback Machine is, Brewster.

BREWSTER KAHLE: The Wayback Machine operates by crawling the World Wide Web, and, actually, with many, many partners, crawling the World Wide Web, and adding those into the Internet Archive’s collections. And those collections become something that, from Archive.org, you can type in a URL or search to go and find a website to be able to then see the web as it was and surf the web as it was. You could see President-elect Trump’s 2008 and 2012 election websites or Hillary Clinton’s old Senate websites. So these websites are now available again as they were. But they’re just pictures of webpages, so they’re not the services behind it. They’re not the databases that climate scientists need, that are currently being used, of NOAA, NASA’s data sets, that have services on them. We would love to go and make it so that we’re not taking snapshots of websites, but whole web services get archived such that they can be used as they were in 2016. So we’re calling out to federal website masters, webmasters, to go and work with us to archive the whole working systems themselves in snapshot form.

AMY GOODMAN: And this whole issue of climate change and the Trump administration, Donald Trump a climate change denier, what in particular are you doing? And if you can talk about moving—well, not exactly moving, but mirroring Internet Archive in Canada, why you’re doing that?

BREWSTER KAHLE: So, there are groups that are collecting the web FTP sites now. They’re going in and trying to do special scripts to go and download all of the different data records that are in these databases. There’s groups in Toronto. There’s going to be a hackathon at the Internet Archive in—on January 7th to try to help tour through the important parts of the federal record, that we can then make a record outside of the government to make sure that it’s permanently available. Then we need to do—beyond that, we need to move it to other countries, because the history of libraries is one of loss. Usually libraries are burned, like the Library of Alexandria in ancient times, and they’re burned by governments. Just the new guys don’t want the old stuff around. They’re often sorry about it tens or hundreds of years later. But if you didn’t make a copy, then it’s just gone. So the idea of having multiple copies keeps stuff safe.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: But, Laurie Allen, during the last climate change-denying administration, that of George Bush, some of the changes that occurred are that the State Department removed climate change from its list of global issues, and the EPA’s pages on global warming and climate change research stopped being updated. Now, do you anticipate worse happening under the Trump administration?

LAURIE ALLEN: I think—I think—I’ll also point out that the Bush administration did—also closed, or attempted to close, some EPA libraries all over the country. I think we—we know that people are concerned. I think there’s good reason to be tremendously concerned. My partners on this project in the Program for Environmental Humanities at Penn have been talking to so many scientists who are deeply concerned. And I think the important point is to—better to be safe than sorry. We have—you know, as Brewster just said, lots of copies keep stuff safe. It’s a kind of a good rule. And it is the role of all of us to make sure that this material continues to be available. And so, yes, we’re concerned, but more than that, it’s just wise to take steps to make sure that, whatever happens, these important facts remain available to future researchers.

AMY GOODMAN: Brewster Kahle, if you could go back to mirroring your website in Canada, why you’ve chosen to go there? Canada has just announced that access to high-speed internet is a fundamental right. And also, how do you stop your own databases now, your own servers, from being hacked?

BREWSTER KAHLE: So, how do we stop things from getting hacked? I think it’s copies, really, and putting them on other sides of fault lines, whether it’s earthquakes or hard drives failing or institutional failure, law changes, regime change. So, Canada is warm to digital libraries in many ways that the United States is becoming potentially less so. So the idea of having multiple legs to the stool. We looked at the television archive, so we will record all of television at the Internet Archive, to find out what the Trump campaign promises had been. And things like closing part of the internet up or threatening to—freedom of the press, going and actively saying—hating journalists—all of these are the things that libraries are built on, the idea of having ongoing access to information, historical information. These are what makes libraries work. And so, let’s just plan for whatever might happen. And who knows? Maybe it’s going to be just a dry run and we never needed to do it, but it’s a good idea in any case.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Well, thanks to the Wayback Machine, we can still read the Mike Pence for Congress site from 2001, which is no longer available via the public web. In one section, Pence’s page reads, quote, "Congress should oppose any effort to recognize homosexuals as a 'discrete and insular minority' entitled to the protection of anti-discrimination laws similar to those extended to women and ethnic minorities. Congress should support the reauthorization of the Ryan White Care Act only after completion of an audit to ensure that federal dollars were no longer being given to organizations that celebrate and encourage the types of behaviors that facilitate the spreading of the HIV virus. Resources should be directed toward those institutions which provide assistance to those seeking to change their sexual behavior." Brewster Kahle, could you talk about that and other comparable sites that are—would no longer be available if this resource were not there?

BREWSTER KAHLE: Certainly. The campaign promises that have been made in the past, or policies and the like, can be changed by anybody that controls the current website. So those who control the present control the past. And as Orwell has warned, those who control the present control the future, so that it’s—we really need to make sure there’s a record of these things. So, Pence has made those go away. There have been Trump—within a day of getting control of dot-gov, they put up websites going and trumpeting Trump properties, that were taken away very quickly. And so, there’s actively managing what it is people can see on the World Wide Web. So, the Archive.org is a free resource for being able to see what was on those websites before. We’ve seen press releases change. George W. Bush announced from the aircraft carrier, and the headline read from the press release, that combat operations in Iraq had ceased. And then, a couple months later, it changed to say major combat operations had ceased. And then, a couple years after that, even during the still same administration, they removed the press release altogether. So, I’m not sure what is more Orwellian: not telling you that you’ve changed a previous press release or making it go away altogether. But unless we have libraries, we wouldn’t know any of that happened.

AMY GOODMAN: Shortly after Michael Flynn was nominated to be President Trump’s national security adviser, he deleted a tweet he had posted referring to false allegations about Hillary Clinton. However, the tweet, from November 2nd, was preserved on the Internet Archive. It reads, quote, "U decide–NYPD Blows Whistle on New Hillary Emails: Money Laundering, Sex Crimes w Children, etc...MUST READ!" Explain what you did with this, and go to the bigger issue you explained about social media and how this is a new, really, area for you to archive.

BREWSTER KAHLE: So, the Internet Archive, working with partners, have been archiving tweets, YouTube, Instagram, these different platforms. Facebook makes it very difficult, unfortunately, to go and record what it is that has been said, and now potentially later deleted. All these things are deleted at some point. The companies go under or whatever. And so, going and keeping a record of these pronouncements—there are now 10,000 official government Twitter channels. So we archive those. But we also do the ones from the campaigns and surrogates and the like, to be able to make rich data sets and making those available now back to researchers, so that we can know what it is that was promised. Television, for instance, is very difficult to access. But on TV.Archive.org, another free resource, you can search based on what people said, including Democracy Now!, and be able to retrieve clips and to put into your blogs and be able to think critically about what has happened. If you can’t quote, compare and contrast, then it just flows over, and you say, "Wait a minute. I think I remember," but you don’t really remember. So the key thing is to be able to quote, compare and contrast. And libraries are there to preserve a permanent record of things that are often ephemeral, like television, Twitter, websites and the like. And it’s a growing importance.

AMY GOODMAN: Brewster Kahle, finally, do you see an existential threat, a unique threat, to the information on the internet today? And to your own Internet Archive, which is really everyone’s?

BREWSTER KAHLE: The internet is, I think, just an amazing experiment in sharing and mutual trust. And people are putting their ideas out there in a very public forum. And unless we go and ensure that that trust is warranted, if we don’t see too much spying so people will run away from it thinking that they’re going to get in trouble for it, these are very important things towards—that have made the World Wide Web possible in the first place. And it may be hard to remember, but it used to be very difficult to get this type of information. [inaudible] the government records might go into the National Archives after an administration changed, and then you’d have to wait six months, 12 months, to be able then to even make a request for one document at a time. But now we have the opportunity to being able to see what’s changed, what the development are, but also enjoy the benefits of enormous taxpayers’ funding towards building databases around climate change, about the weather data, that’s much more available than it ever was before. Let’s keep that going. Let’s continue to build on the trust that has been the hallmark of the World Wide Web. We just need libraries and archives, academics, people that are working in federal websites that may be displaced over—as changes in administration happen, to work together to make permanent what it is the taxpayers have paid for.
http://www.alternet.org/investigations/ ... tion-trump



THANKS JOAN ever so much for helping with that

Rigorous Intuition Discussion Board Archive
Postby Joao » Thu Nov 24, 2016 7:34 am

viewtopic.php?f=33&t=40198
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Internet Archive Setting Up Shop in Canada to Avoid Trum

Postby elfismiles » Sun Jan 01, 2017 11:39 am

:thumbsup :yay :angelwings: :lovehearts: :yay :thumbsup

Thank you SLAD and all who GET this and do there part to...

"Protect and Preserve!"

seemslikeadream » 01 Jan 2017 15:02 wrote:for members that take offense to posting whole articles here please understand

So the idea of having multiple copies keeps stuff safe
-BREWSTER KAHLE

INVESTIGATIONS
Internet Archive Setting Up Shop in Canada to Avoid Facing Persecution from Trump
The founder of the Internet Archive, Brewster Kahle, explains why.
By Amy Goodman / Democracy Now! December 29, 2016
<snip>
http://www.alternet.org/investigations/ ... tion-trump


THANKS JOAN ever so much for helping with that

Rigorous Intuition Discussion Board Archive
Postby Joao » Thu Nov 24, 2016 7:34 am

viewtopic.php?f=33&t=40198
User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8512
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: Internet Archive Setting Up Shop in Canada to Avoid Trum

Postby vince » Sun Jan 01, 2017 12:03 pm

How AWESOME is Internet Archive???????
THIS AWESOME!
You can listen to (just about) EVERY SINGLE KPFA's "Over The Edge" show EVER MADE!!!
PLUS, special Negativland footage.... like these:
https://archive.org/details/negativland ... itleSorter
vince
 
Posts: 509
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 11:19 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: Internet Archive Setting Up Shop in Canada to Avoid Trum

Postby seemslikeadream » Sun Jan 01, 2017 12:07 pm

and remember this

INTERNET ARCHIVE SUCCESSFULLY FENDS OFF SECRET FBI ORDER
Kim Zetter
December 1 2016, 2:01 p.m.
A DECADE AGO, the FBI sent Brewster Kahle, founder of the Internet Archive, a now-infamous type of subpoena known as a National Security Letter, demanding the name, address and activity record of a registered Internet Archive user. The letter came with an everlasting gag order, barring Kahle from discussing the order with anyone but his attorney — not even his wife could know.

........

https://theintercept.com/2016/12/01/int ... inst-nsls/


Internet Archive...OLD BOOKS :yay :yay :yay
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Internet Archive Setting Up Shop in Canada to Avoid Trum

Postby parel » Thu Jan 05, 2017 7:59 pm

JAN 2, 2017 @ 11:07 AM 75,334 VIEWS The Little Black Book of Billionaire Secrets

How The Washington Post's Defense Of Its Russian Hacking Story Unraveled Through Web Archiving



Image

Kalev Leetaru , CONTRIBUTOR
I write about the broad intersection of data and society.

Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.

The control room of a power plant in Nebraska. (AP Photo/Josh Funk)

As the Washington Post’s story of Russian hackers burrowed deep within the US electrical grid, ready to plunge the nation into darkness at the flip of a switch unraveled into the story of a single non-grid-connected laptop with a piece of malware on it, the Post has faced fierce criticism over how it fact checked and verified the details of its story. It turns out that the Post not only did not fact check the story until after it was published live on its website, but in its defense of the story, the Post made a number of false statements about what was written when, which the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine reveals.

When I wrote yesterday about the Washington Post story, Kris Coratti, Vice President of Communications and Events for the Washington Post had offered just a single emailed response and had not responded to any of my remaining questions regarding the Post's fact checking and construction of the article in question. Last night, just over 20 hours later, she finally did respond to two of my questions.

As I noted yesterday, it seemed odd that Burlington Electric issued a formal response refuting the Post’s claims just an hour and a half after the Post’s publication. This would suggest that the Post would have gotten a response from Burlington if only it had just contacted the utility prior to publication, as is required by standard journalistic practice.

In fact, when I asked the Post why it had not contacted the utilities prior to publication, in her emailed response to me, Ms. Coratti asserted that the Post had indeed contacted both utilities for comment prior to publication and had not received a reply from either and so proceeded with publication. In fact, she went as far as to state “we had contacted the state’s two major power suppliers, as these sentences from the first version of the story attest: ‘It is unclear which utility reported the incident. Officials from two major Vermont utilities, Green Mountain Power and Burlington Electric, could not be immediately reached for comment Friday.’"

If this statement was present in the very first version of the story published at 7:55PM, that would mean that the Post had reached out to the companies for comment prior to publication and received no response.

However, as the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine shows, this is actually false. Archived snapshots of the story at 8:16PM and 8:46PM make no claims about having contacted either utility and state instead only that “While it is unclear which utility reported the incident, there are just two major utilities in Vermont, Green Mountain Power and Burlington Electric.” No claim is made anywhere in the article about the Post having contacted the utilities for comment.

In fact, it was not until an hour after publication, somewhere between 8:47PM and 9:24PM that the Post finally updated its story to include the statement above that it had contacted the two utilities for comment.

I reached out to Mike Kanarick, Director of Customer Care, Community Engagement and Communications for Burlington Electric Department for comment on why his company had not responded to the Post’s prepublication request for comment.

It turns out that the reason that Burlington Electric did not response to the Post’s prepublication request for comment is that the Post actually did not reach out for comment until after it had already run its story. The Post’s article went live on its website at 7:55PM EST, but according to Mr. Kanarick, the first contact from the Post was a phone call from reporter Adam Entous at 8:05PM, 10 minutes after the Post's story had been published.

It is simply astounding that any newspaper, let alone one of the Post’s reputation and stature, would run a story and then ten minutes after publication, turn around and finally ask the central focus of the article for comment. Not only does this violate every professional norm and standard of journalistic practice, but it feeds directly into the public's growing distrust of media. In the era of “fake news” hysteria where publications like the Washington Post tout their extensive fact checking and vetting workflows as reasons that the public should trust their reporting over anyone else, it is surprising to see just how chaotic or non-existent that fact checking really is.

What exactly is “fact checking” when a newspaper runs a story and only calls the party involved after publication for comment on the published and live story that is already circulating widely? That suggests that the Post’s idea of fact checking is to publish first and then correct the story by rewriting it bit by bit in the hours following publication, rather than collecting all facts and developing a definitive hard story before ever allowing it to be published. While both models might be called “fact checking,” the latter is what leads to false and misleading news circulating, especially as other news outlets picked up on the Post’s story and ran it assuming that the Post had conducted all of the necessary fact checking.

It also tells us that the Post ran its story based solely and exclusively on the word of US Government sources that it placed absolute trust in. That the Post would run an entire story based exclusively on the word of its US Government sources and without any other external fact checking (such as contacting the two utilities), offers a fascinating glimpse into just how much blind trust American newspapers place in Government sources, to repeat their claims verbatim without the slightest bit of vetting or confirmation.

Moreover, Ms. Coratti’s response to me also asserted that “as soon as Burlington Electric released its statement … we modified the story to remove assertions that the electric grid had been penetrated and later added the editor's note.” Yet, as I noted in my response back to her (to which she has not responded), more than a full hour elapsed between Burlington’s press release and the Post finally updating its story. While a one hour response time might have been considered lightning fast and nearly instantaneous in a former era, in the world of social media in which stories spread in seconds, a delay of an entire hour in updating a story with critical facts that change the entire focus of the story and essentially amount to a retraction of the original narrative, represents an eternity during which the false original narrative continued to spread. Ms. Coratti also did not respond to a request for comment on why the Post took more than 11 hours to post an editor’s note notifying readers that the article had been substantively rewritten and the original thesis retracted.

It was also fascinating that the Post itself does not appear to closely track the changes it makes to stories, with Ms. Coratti writing with respect to the article title that “we repeatedly modify and refine headlines as we publish a story on multiple platforms; we do not keep track of such changes.”

It is both fascinating and troubling that the Post’s defense of its reporting in this case involved asserting that it had contacted the utility in question prior to publication, that it had included a statement attesting to this in the very first version of the article and that it immediately updated its story as soon as the utility issued a formal statement. Yet, all three of these statements appear to be false.

Ms. Coratti did not respond to a request for comment on the fact that her responses would appear to suggest that the Post itself is confused as to what it wrote, when and in what version of the article, though her earlier response about article headlines suggests the Post does not version its articles to record what they say and when. In an era in which any WordPress blogger has automatic strict versioning recording every edit they make to their posts through time, it is all the more surprising and shocking that the Post would not do the same.

Putting this all together, we see that the “fact checking” of mainstream journalism does not quite match the gleaming pristine aura touted by the journalism community in which top tier outlets are a bulwark against false and misleading news due to their rigorous and extensive fact checking processes that will not allow an article to be published until every detail has been fully confirmed. Instead, even the most celebrated outlets like the Post will run a story without the most basic of fact checking or, in this case, appear to have done their fact checking only after publication, allowing a false narrative to ricochet virally through both social and mainstream mediums for hours before correction.

Moreover, it was only through the incredible Internet Archive Wayback Machine, which saves snapshots of more than 279 billion webpages and stretches back more than 21 years to the very dawn of the modern web, that we were able to reconstruct the chronology of this Washington Post article and show how the story evolved and when certain statements were added or removed. Without the Wayback Machine, we would have only the Post’s word as to what its article said when and, as Ms. Coratti noted, the Post itself does not version or archive the entirety of its stories to be able to go back and definitively examine what was said and when.

In the end, as we peel back the gleaming veneer, we see that the way in which mainstream journalists really work don’t always match our expectations or indeed the claims that the journalism community itself makes about the rigor of things like fact checking and verification.

Thus, as I’ve said again and again, the answer to “fake news” and the issue of false and misleading information in general is not to place a few elites in the role of ultimate arbitrator of truth, but rather to develop a citizenry that is data and information literate. We also see that in a world in which incredible organizations like the Internet Archive are preserving the world’s online news for posterity and documenting the editing and rewriting and airbrushing that that news undergoes, news outlets must be far more transparent in how they report on the world around us, as ordinary citizens can now go back and fact check the fact checkers.
parel
 
Posts: 361
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 7:22 pm
Location: New Zealand
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Internet Archive Setting Up Shop in Canada to Avoid Trum

Postby Luther Blissett » Fri Jan 13, 2017 6:06 pm

The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4993
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)


Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 164 guests