DISQUS

dave Yes, that's a common question, first I have to ask you if you think it does?

What happens when someone goes to one of Marc's sites -- how would they know to go to archive.org?

Have you tested it your assumption? Have you looked to see how complete an archive they have of your sites? (I have, it's not complete.)

What I want is better than what archive.org provides. It could be part of the solution, but if it were the complete solution, we'd just host our sites there, and that would be the end of the problem. But we don't -- for good reason. They don't have the technical answer, they don't host your domains (and is there a way to pay a fee for a domain that lasts for perpetuity?) and they don't provide any guarantee that part or all of your archive will be maitnained for any period of time. Even if they did, you'd have to ask what's the likelihood they'll be around in 50 years, or 100 years to fullfill the terms of the agreement? That's why the longeivty of the institution doing the archive matters too. Harvard parterning with archive.org might be a good solution. Add a SLA in there, and we might be getting close to the answer.

eas As Dave points out, Archive.org is incomplete. There are various reasons for this, including the fact that some people don't want their sites archived because they loose control of their data, but that gives me an idea.

What if those who cared could communicate a policy to archive.org. Maybe they could say "archive this, but don't make it publicly available for 5 years from the date you archived it. Or, archive this, but "hide it from public view until 10 years after it disappears from the web."