To use ArcHive now: https://dhenz14.github.io/archive/
Read more about ArcHive: https://github.com/Dhenz14/archive
▶️ 3Speak
How to use ArcHive
21 days ago in Threespeak by theycallmedan (79)Founder
$34.72
- Max accepted payout: $100,000.00
- Past Payouts $34.72
- - Author $17.38
- - Curators & beneficiaries $17.34
- > spk.beneficiary: $1.74
- > thorkellnft: $0.17
813 votes
- trafalgar: $7.54
- threespeakvoter: $2.37
- somecallmejake: $2.20
- broncnutz: $1.20
- fw206: $1.19
- edicted: $1.06
- eddiespino: $0.86
- meesterboom: $0.81
- buttcoins: $0.68
- traf: $0.63
- smartsteem: $0.56
- azircon: $0.56
- papilloncharity: $0.51
- mynewlife: $0.45
- aliento: $0.45
- louis88: $0.43
- sandymeyer: $0.43
- schlees: $0.42
- gunthertopp: $0.42
- ausbitbank: $0.40
- and 793 more
Interesting project. I know people have archived the tweets of politicians, but that tended to be on the same site and so liable to be deleted. The blockchain is forever so a better solution.
What does it do with images?
I'm tempted to create another account just for this as I doubt people will want the archives on my main feed.
It makes a normal Hive post, so images are stored as normal Hive images are stored. SPK Network will be another choice
I saw that someone ArcHived a paper I linked in my latest post, but none of the figures showing the data were ArcHived. Much of the utility of scientific papers derives from the data reported, so it is unfortunate these images were not saved. Is it possible to look into the issue and see if it can be resolved?
https://peakd.com/@anti-archive/archive-1767406473452-6hsv7n
Also, I attempted to ArcHive:
https://www.nationallibertyalliance.org/sites/default/files/primer_on_the_grand_jury_common_law_natural_law_and_equity_20160712.pdf
But the result was failure.
https://dhenz14.github.io/archive/index.html?v=1767409568580#
The process of ArcHiving a site is astoundingly simple. It would be an extraordinary weapon in the fight to preserve information that is being purged from the internet.
https://peakd.com/archivedcontenthaf/@bravetest/archive-1766202654541-8n39e2
I had to let the script shield down, but it worked as advertised on brave.
Congratulations to us all!
Thank you, Dan!
@bravetest
When I saw it being tested, I thought the vision was to store content on-chain and probably monetize it to generate revenue and buy pressure.
But this vision of storing a copy of your online existence on Web3 of digital footprint of Web2 platform, can help a lot. I heard how Satoshi’s identity was removed from the web. He was known by many forks, and suddenly his digital footprints were removed. In such cases, this is a good use case, as it would be much harder to remove someone’s identity or existence from Web2 for any shady reasons (web3 easy backup).
Thanks for explaining, it’s a bigger vision than what I imagined.
And yes, for some content, it’s hard to work with, like paywalled content on Medium, etc. Or some news sites that block scraping or use built-in checks so no one steals their content and makes AI-respun versions of it.
Looking forward to seeing what libraries we will build with it. Also, I think Antisocialist would be interested in this, as he wanted to store copies of some books on Hive, and this makes it easier.
It's basically a blockchain powered waybackmachine? That's pretty cool. I would probably improve the ui a bit to make it easier to search of archived pages. But great idea and I love the name twist!
https://web.archive.org/web/20040627124531/http://www.freedomnowok.org/gpage.html
I tried to archive this page, but it kept taking me to the github link of arc-hive.
Thanks, I just tried and got the same thing. it seems to only happens on this waybackmachine site, looking into it.
Thank you, thank you, thank you very much for making burn a thing!
Really cool video. I love how clearly you explained using ArcHive, super helpful.Thanks for this. Definitely going to try ArcHive myself now .
Epic work, this is much needed for Hive and the internet in general!
I am extremely happy to see this come to Hive. It is an essential function blockchain media can provide, and the recent demise of Archive.today demonstrates the absolute necessity of such archival mechanism(s) to the persistence of factual historical records that enable forthright speech to be proved, and can disprove fake news. Given the ongoing purge of existentially important information from the internet, little can have more utility to free people.
Thanks!
@theycallmedan congratulations excellent projec
Obrigado por promover a Língua Portuguesa em suas postagens.
Vamos seguir fortalecendo a comunidade lusófona dentro da Hive.
Parece algo muy importante quisiera podré verlo o leer en español
Ya me di cuenta que está en español en el enlace gracias
That's all well and good, but what if your video disappears from this post? I lost 84 videos from 3speak. I wanted to keep 3spk for archival purposes. And tested ArcHive.
@anti-archive
Can we expect video extraction and support for playback?
Perhaps through 3speak?
Great stuff!
I don't know of a way a single person can prove they haven't changed the webpage content they archived. In other words, a person can easily first change the webpage content and then generate the hashes. So others have to trust that the person who archived didn't make any changes before archiving.
To overcome this, there can be verifiers who very quickly check a URL right after it gets archived and verify that the archived content matches the content on the URL at this moment in time. I'm not sure we can get around the need for verifiers. But the use case seems solid and it should work. And I really like the client-side and bookmarklets approach. :)
Can't AI verify the contents being ArcHived when the request is made?
I'm not sure what there is to verify by an AI. It boils down to whether you trust the person who archived the content that they didn't make any modification before archiving. The same trust is required if an AI does the archiving or performs whatever checks.
If there are multiple independent parties verifying that the contents of the link match what was archived, then you have a more decentralized mechanism for verification. It could be feasible for like 50 or 100 nodes to participate in such a verification, the nodes would be pretty lightweight.
It seems to me an AI would be ideal as a mechanism to compare the data being ArcHived to the data published at the URL. There are ways to conceal things in blobs, steganography, for example, that people looking at a site with Mark I eyeballs might take a bit to notice, or even miss, but AI would detect instantly. While the size of the files submitted for ArcHiving would not match the size of the files on site in the event of attempted deception, which would eventually be noticeable by a human, the AI could do this much faster, and would be less likely IMHO to miss something because someone wiped their eyes, was a little sleepy, or took a drink of coffee. I just see comparing files and images as something AI is perfect at and people would not yearn to do like it was opening presents on Christmas, but rather as what it is, bookkeeping, with all it's excitement and joys. Certainly people could be notified in the event of mismatch to investigate just what was being added or subtracted from such published information that was being ArcHived, and further, that the process could appear to go through while the ArcHival request could instead be routed to a temporary file that could be used to enable those specific alterations to be highlighted by AI for review and the intent of the changes potentially understood, which would then enable that to also be ArcHived along with the site's true status, which would facilitate enabling those accessing the ArcHive later to note and understand such attacks on historical information and the reasons actors had attempted to misinform people about it.
I expect most ArcHival requests would not feature such malicious interposition, and people would be unnecessary in reviewing the requests except in such cases, which would be far less ennervating due to the fact each time they were notified to review such requests there would be the mystery of intent to resolve. AI is worthless IMHO to ascertain such intent because it is incapable of understanding, while people are bored by mere accounting 'book work' and more likely to therefore miss signals that would indicate attempted nefarious deception that AI would not.
Just as ArcHive seems a perfect match between Hive's strengths as a high fidelity record of information publishing, and the growing need for that record in a world increasingly being censored and gaslit, AI seems to perfectly align it's strengths to the need for dry comparison of records to detect infidelity of ArcHival requests, while leaving interpretation of why such infidelity is undertaken to real people capable of actual understanding, unlike inhuman, non-living mechanisms. Since AI isn't agentic in itself, but must be provided programming to slant it's processing to bias that processing one way or another, and people are all biased and must be capable of compensating for their bias to be trustworthy (which I am sure we all do differently and more or potentially far less satisfactorily) I find the following statement somewhat without basis.
Either AI is intentionally biased by it's programmers, or such mathematical processes as checking data fidelity is simply a matter of competence of programmers to write the algorithms. There is no inherent bias in such a mechanism for or against political or financial interests. Your bathroom scale isn't motivated to make you appear slimmer if Demoblicans are in power or fatter if Republicrats are. Such biases have to be deliberately injected into the weighting of things on the scale by the programmers.
Hopefully AI's like Alter and Grok are a response to the blatant biases of the people profiting from AI have injected into OpenAI and Gemini, which demonstrates the ability of people to detect such bias and to reject it, and make new tools without that bias, or at least, less of it. While all people have biases, and mathematical algorithms do not, reasonable people recognize the need for a fact based historical record upon which to base their own understanding, and to provide to our posterity from which to form theirs, and to seek to eliminate their biases for the purpose of factual fidelity unreasonable people continually seek to inject into historical records to derange the understanding of others and our posterity.
Pretty sure TheyCallMeDan is a reasonable man, and would scrupulously seek to employ unbiased mechanisms to detect infidelity. If he did turn out to have injected some biases into that process, it would presumably be quickly revealed and the tool forked with such biases removed by actually reasonable people. Frankly, that appears to me to be why TheyCallMeDan is making ArcHive available, because we can't trust remnant archival processes due to their bias.
The bottom line is that AI and math is inherently unbiased, and biases would have to be injected in, while people are inherently biased, and terrible at interminable data checking that AI is perfectly suited for. AI doesn't get bored, or have things it would rather do, which people all do.
Edit:
I doubt such a high percentage of Hive users would eagerly strive to spend the necessary time and be competent to do so flawlessly to verify the fidelity of ArcHival requests. If there were 5 or 10 that did so I'd be very happy, and doubt that would enable timely ArcHiving. That seems nominal to examine flagged ArcHival requests, which would also not delay ArcHiving because of the rapidity with which computers can compare data and verify fidelity compared to people.
I guess some misunderstanding happened. I wasn't suggesting that people should manually do any verification. They can instead run a software node which would completely automatically do the verification. It would be a simple thing for the software node to fetch the webpage content and compare it with what was archived - I don't think AI is needed for it, it would be some simple algorithm. That's all.
That is all AI is at it's essence. However, it seems we completely agree, so that's great.
Please, please, please make burn an option.
Decline sends most of any votes received to trending.
Burn benefits us all equally.
I'm sure many will be interested in the idea.
Merry Christmas