Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Wednesday November 30 2016, @01:54PM   Printer-friendly
from the you-can-never-have-too-many-offsite-backups-eh dept.

The Internet Archive plans to create a backup of its data in Canada in response to the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States:

The Internet Archive, a nonprofit that saves copies of old web pages, is creating a backup of its database in Canada, in response to the election of Donald Trump. "On November 9th in America, we woke up to a new administration promising radical change," the organization wrote in a blogpost explaining the move. "It was a firm reminder that institutions like ours, built for the long-term, need to design for change."

[...] The move will cost millions, according to the Internet Archive, which is soliciting donations. In their post, the Internet Archive justified its decision to backup its data in Canada, claiming that Trump could threaten an open internet. "For us, it means keeping our cultural materials safe, private and perpetually accessible. It means preparing for a Web that may face greater restrictions."


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 01 2016, @01:09AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 01 2016, @01:09AM (#435230)

    A tweet is not an editorial holding themselves to account on breitbart.com
    Furthermore, breitbart's throwing of their own reporter under the trump bus wasn't an article either, it was a reality-tv quality HR fuckup.

    Nor is some random hyperpartisan blogger's skewed characterization of a NYT article an accurate description of reality.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 01 2016, @04:03AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 01 2016, @04:03AM (#435262)

    Way to move the goalpost, you dolt. The statement was "The fact that they are publicly willing to own their mistakes", which I do believe a tweet qualifies.

    Throwing the reporter under the bus, or holding them to account when evidence clearly contradicted what they were reporting? Not only that, but stand-by the decision even when loosing one of their most recognizable contributors. And if they would have stood by the reporter, it would have just been proof of bias. Essentially, they can never hit those vaunted hills of "trust" since they aren't shoveling your brand of it. Gotcha.

    The "hyperpartisan blogger" quotes the NYT article in full with just an opening paragraph to set context. I note the New York Times omitting completely Breitbart accusation.

    But here's another "hyperpartisan blogger" reaching the same conclusion

    http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/05/how-did-progressive-journalists-get-pigford-so-wrong/275593/ [theatlantic.com]

    but with a nice dose of smear so fart sniffers, such as yourself, can maintain their smug.