RSS
As A Final Fuck You To Free Speech On Tumblr, Verizon Blocked Archivists
from the seriously-guys? dept
By now, of course, you're aware that the Verizon-owned Tumblr (which was bought by Yahoo, which was bought by Verizon and merged into "Oath" with AOL and other no longer relevant properties) has suddenly decided that nothing sexy is allowed on its servers. This took many by surprise because apparently a huge percentage of Tumblr was used by people to post somewhat racy content. Knowing that a bunch of content was about to disappear, the famed Archive Team sprung into action -- as they've done many times in the past. They set out to archive as much of the content on Tumblr that was set to be disappeared down the memory hole as possible... and it turns out that Verizon decided as a final "fuck you" to cut them off. Jason Scott, the mastermind behind the Archive Team announced over the weekend that Verizon appeared to be blocking their IPs:
On Sunday, Scott announced that the Archive Team has figured out a way to get past the blocks:
Still, this is a pretty fucked up thing for Verizon to do. It's one thing to decide to completely change the kind of content you host. That's their call. But, at the very least, allow the people who focus on archiving the internet for historical purposes the chance to actually do what they do best. Blocking the Archive Team is a truly obnoxious move, cementing Verizon's reputation as really not caring one bit about the damage the company does.
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
A more pointed criticism of this decision: The works of queer people were most likely deleted first—and forever, if there were no backups beforehand.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
The problem...
I have been in tech for 40+ years and this move to "cloud" is the worse thing that's happened to tech since the copy protected floppy disc or software dongle.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The problem...
That is, in part, why we have a resurgence of a “own your content” mindset via the IndieWeb movement. Tumblr can’t delete your content if it’s not on Tumblr in the first place.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The problem...
Even the best intentions often down't survive the real world. Witness what happened to PINAC -- the founder got locked out of his own site by partners. All it takes is one argument and a fit of ego, and suddenly one person steals the content of dozens.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
The 'Fuck You' standard
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The 'Fuck You' standard
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe they should all go back to business school. Or atleast go back to the drawing board for a new plan.
They keep trying to use a screwdriver on a rivet and wonder why it's not working.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
or kindergarten
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Unfortunately, reality is more often the other way around.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Unfortunately, a modern business school will tell them they're on the right track and that they should double down. Business schools went to heck when they adopted the "greed is good" credo. Everything else grew from that.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm betting this is all an intentional prelude to Tumblr shutting down completely.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Not sure if it was intentional, but with the disaster the rule change has been it might end up that way anyway.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Activist journalists spinning lies to go after the jobs and source of revenue for citizens who argue legally for issues important to them.
The destruction of historical record on the internet to wipe away these caches of information that can spread awareness or used to research complicated issues.
Within the stated goal of eliminating 'sexy' content on Tumlr, there is a huge amount of unrelated material disappearing along with it quietly and designed to go without notice.
The trap is sprung to curtail the internet. We see now that its been replaced with an AOL or Cable -type network with financial institutions and tech giants hand-in-hand working to strangle and site that recognizes legal speech outside central control.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Or is that only okay if Google or Facebook own the platform engaging in censorship?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"Fuck You" is protected speech, as I'm sure Mike's said more than once here. So, yeah, they can do it, and luckily Mike has another platform on which to bitch about it.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"It's one thing to decide to completely change the kind of content you host. That's their call."
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Right.
Nobody has a right to free speech on Tumblr. Tumblr has a legal right to take down content on its service, for any time, for any reason, or for no reason at all. Tumblr is absolutely, 100% within its legal rights here.
Are you arguing that just because something is legal, that means nobody should criticize it?
If so, great. This article is legal, therefore you should shut the fuck up.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
"They have the legal right to do this" is not equivalent to "they should do this." You can simultaneously believe that a thing (1) is legal, (2) *should* be legal, and (3) is not a good idea.
Permit me to demonstrate.
It is legal for you to hit yourself in the face with a hammer, very hard.
Do you understand the difference between something being legal and something being a good thing to do?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Within that, though: there's a wide range of legal but stupid, which is what this article is about.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Speaking of which, Verizon could decide to double-down on dickery and go after the archivists under the CFA. The IP blocking clearly demonstrates intent to prevent users at those locations from accessing the affected pages and they admit to circumventing those restrictions on twitter.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Please provide proof of your claim and the necessary citations required for verifying your evidence.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: only okay if Google or Facebook own the platform
Whether that’s a good business strategy is another question entirely.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
"By playing this video you agree to Twitter's use of cookies
This use may include analytics, personalization, and ads."
...which I absolutely don't, so I absolutely won't.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
https://blog.archive.org/author/jasonscott/
The guy who manages archives at the Library of Congress Approved Archive.org?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Well, maybe not, but who knows? I'd sure rather it wasn't even a possibility.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yes. That's why Verizon bought Yahoo. Because it wanted to blackmail people on Tumblr.
Why do some people see a company do something dumb and immediately assume it's part of some brilliant secret play instead of just, y'know, dumb?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Add Your Comment