[HN Gopher] DPReview is being archived by the Archive Team
___________________________________________________________________
DPReview is being archived by the Archive Team
Author : jacooper
Score : 343 points
Date : 2023-03-22 16:37 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (old.reddit.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (old.reddit.com)
| kepler1 wrote:
| What this indicates to me is that most websites are in a constant
| state of breaking and needing maintenance, such that no company
| wants to have even a small distraction / obligation / annoyance
| of keeping a site up. Has the feel of like, you inherit a free
| building that's constantly falling apart, might as well get rid
| of it, no matter how many people find it useful.
|
| Is that the reality of owning a website?
| capableweb wrote:
| The title is wrong, Archive Team (https://wiki.archiveteam.org/)
| is behind these archiving efforts, not The Internet Archive.
|
| The dump will surely end up being stored at the The Internet
| Archive, but they are two different entities with different
| collaborators and different goals.
|
| Archive Team describes themselves like this:
|
| > Archive Team is a loose collective of rogue archivists,
| programmers, writers and loudmouths dedicated to saving our
| digital heritage.
|
| If you want to contribute to the efforts, you can join #dprived
| (on hackint), once the Warrior
| (https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/ArchiveTeam_Warrior)
| project is up and running, it's really easy to contribute.
| Basically run a VM and you're up and running.
| jacooper wrote:
| Fixed.
| notpushkin wrote:
| Or a Docker container, if that's easier for you!
|
| https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/ArchiveTeam_Warrior#I...
|
| Perhaps run it right away even if #dprived isn't ready for the
| Warrior yet - you'll be helping Archive Team folks save other
| stuff, like Telegram and Reddit.
| formerly_proven wrote:
| Can you select which kinds of sites it touches? Blindly
| copying/uploading content from e.g. Telegram or Reddit is
| problematic in various jurisdictions.
| notpushkin wrote:
| Here's the current list of projects I see in the dashboard:
| URLTeam 2 (URL shorteners), Heroku, Clara.io, issuu, Zhihu,
| pixiv, Telegram, Reddit, YouTube, Periscope, GitHub (in
| cooperation with Internet Archive and GitHub), MediaFire,
| Google Sites Classic, Pastebin, VKontakte, Stack Exchange,
| and some generic ones grabbing URLs from various sources.
|
| You can choose what project you'd like to work on if you're
| concerned with legal issues: https://u.ale.sh/warrior-
| projects.png
| TheTechRobo wrote:
| You select the project you run at any given moment. You can
| also select Archiveteam's Choice, which is usually the most
| urgent or the one with the most IPs needed, but if you do
| want to select it yourself, you pick the project.
| lopkeny12ko wrote:
| > The title is wrong, Archive Team
| (https://wiki.archiveteam.org/) is behind these archiving
| efforts, not The Internet Archive.
|
| Doesn't Archive Team upload artifacts to Internet Archive as
| the output of archiving? What's the practical difference?
| capableweb wrote:
| Yes, which is what I wrote on the line under the one you
| quoted...
|
| > The dump will surely end up being stored at the The
| Internet Archive, but they are two different entities with
| different collaborators and different goals.
|
| Archive.org is a bit more careful with what they archive,
| while Archive Team doesn't care about your robots.txt, Terms
| and Conditions or other things, they simply work around it
| and try to archive as much as they can, no matter what you
| think.
|
| Many of the people who contribute to Archive Team are also
| volunteers/supporters of Archive.org and vice-versa.
|
| Bit more about the philosophy behind Archive Team can be
| found here: https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/Philosophy
| ocdtrekkie wrote:
| That really just makes it sound like Archive Team is a
| separate entity to provide plausible deniability for an
| organization that's already in another major lawsuit for
| copyright infringement.
| mynameisvlad wrote:
| That's a pretty bold claim. Just because people from one
| group are part of the other and vice versa does not in
| any way mean that the groups themselves are linked.
|
| Especially since a lot of the people at the IA would be
| proponents of archiving. It would make sense that at
| least some of them feel like the IA should be doing more
| and start a rogue group that takes their ideology to the
| extreme.
| ocdtrekkie wrote:
| If it was a "rogue group", the IA would not agree to host
| the content. I imagine a good lawyer would shatter any
| sort of difference between Internet Archive and Archive
| Team, if there's a large number of common members, and
| one literally exists to scrape content to feed into the
| other.
|
| But again, that's just what it sounds like to me.
| pessimizer wrote:
| > Just because people from one group are part of the
| other and vice versa does not in any way mean that the
| groups themselves are linked.
|
| No, that's quite literally a link. "Link" is a metaphor
| for a chain, and that's how a chain looks: interlinked.
| It be a link if they were even located in the same
| building.
| mynameisvlad wrote:
| All it shows is that they both have similar member lists.
| Which is a given considering how extremely niche the
| topic of "internet archival" is.
|
| How does that actually link the two organizations?
|
| By your extremely broad definition, every organization in
| the world is "linked" to every other by the fact that
| they all are Earth based. That's technically correct I
| guess, but not even remotely helpful in actually
| establishing a connection between two organizations.
| [deleted]
| rurp wrote:
| Many folks are justifying this decision on the basis that Amazon
| might lose some amount of money keeping the site up so of course
| they are shutting it down. That take isn't wrong, but man it's
| depressing. The lack of common goods in the digital world bums me
| out, especially since that world keeps occupying more and more of
| people's time.
|
| In the physical world there are countless spaces that exist as an
| open ended resource that people can use in a myriad of ways to
| enhance their lives and community. Things like city parks,
| libraries, national parks, blm land, lakes, etc. Places that will
| likely exist for decades or centuries. But there is almost none
| of that online. Most things are run by profit maximizing
| corporations that only look at the world through that one lens.
|
| I don't think it _has_ to be this way, but unfortunately the
| current culture is too ok with it for much to change in the
| foreseeable future.
| troutwine wrote:
| > In the physical world there are countless spaces that exist
| as an open ended resource that people can use in a myriad of
| ways to enhance their lives and community. Things like city
| parks, libraries, national parks, blm land, lakes, etc. Places
| that will likely exist for decades or centuries. But there is
| almost none of that online. Most things are run by profit
| maximizing corporations that only look at the world through
| that one lens.
|
| And even these need constant upkeep to preserve from the
| paperclip maximizers we've put in the heart of our economic
| system. Some of what makes the web so ephemeral is the need to
| constantly maintain it, even if that maintenance is low, and
| it's so convenient to just stop that maintenance. I do imagine
| we'll eventually figure it out -- on the scale of things, we
| haven't been _doing_ the web for all that long -- but I bet the
| places that last will start out as long-term concerns with an
| ethos not unlike a library, an ethos much, much different than
| you'll find at any place trying to maximize paperclips in a
| finite world. Wikipedia seems like a lasting public good,
| Internet Archive (knock on wood) as well.
| PTOB wrote:
| This is a bit heartbreaking. So few good sources of info like
| this.
| DeathArrow wrote:
| As a photographer that's very sad. I've learned a lot by speaking
| with people on DPReview forums and seeing the works of others
| there.
|
| Even the reviews were good enough. I wonder were DPReview
| regulars will be going to hang on.
|
| I wish Amazon never bought DPReview.
| Tepix wrote:
| Chris Niccolls and Jordan Drake have been amazing in terms of
| producing a huge quantity of high quality reviews and videos over
| the years. I'm happy that they found new positions at Petapixel:
| https://petapixel.com/2023/03/21/chris-niccolls-and-jordan-d...
| dang wrote:
| Recent and related:
|
| _DPReview.com to close_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35248296 - March 2023 (346
| comments)
|
| Also:
|
| _DPReview Is Shutting Down_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35258299 - March 2023 (1
| comment)
|
| _Amazon is shutting down DPReview, the go-to camera reviews
| website_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35257349 - March
| 2023 (4 comments)
|
| _Amazon layoffs will shut down camera review site DPReview.com
| after 25 years_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35252372 -
| March 2023 (1 comment)
|
| _Dpreview to be shut down in another round of Amazon layoffs_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35250086 - March 2023 (2
| comments)
| tambourine_man wrote:
| I'm so glad there are people doing these jobs. True heroes of our
| time.
| rr808 wrote:
| I'm going to miss that site. I'll probably never buy another
| camera - but still liked reading it. I guess that's why Amazon is
| shutting it down.
| DeathArrow wrote:
| This reminds me of Steve's Digicams shutting down.
| mullingitover wrote:
| As a photographer I'm livid that Amazon bought DPReview just to
| run it into the ground. That site was a treasure trove of
| knowledge and it'll be missed.
|
| I will go out of my way to be sure I never purchase a scrap of
| camera gear on Amazon again.
| davidgay wrote:
| > As a photographer I'm livid that Amazon bought DPReview just
| to run it into the ground.
|
| Amazon ran it for longer (13 years) than it's original owner
| (12 years). That's not "run it into the ground".
|
| Complaints are more convincing (I don't like dpreview being
| closed either) when they are reasonable.
| toomuchtodo wrote:
| Amazon could've turned it over to the community, right? Maybe
| throw in some AWS credits until they could move to a server
| or two?
| bluedino wrote:
| That party could then remove all the Amazon links and
| replace them with B&H links out of spite.
| polar wrote:
| > the community
|
| Who would that be, exactly?
| shagie wrote:
| Would you like to buy the backing auth system for DPReview?
| Alternatively, if you auth on there that you haven't used
| in a few years, how would you feel about that getting sold
| to some person in the community or an advertiser (maybe
| Broadway Photo would like to buy it...)?
|
| A decade of some integrations into Amazon - what effort
| would it take to remove it?
|
| While its a loss (and it is a great loss), the
| possibilities for things to go horribly awry if someone
| else was to buy it... and the "this is hosted for
| perpetuity but all of the information is half a decade out
| of date and kind of embarrassing now" is also a real risk.
|
| A transition of ownership comes with some risk and cost for
| Amazon that is more than the loss of the site _to Amazon_
| and a transfer of ownership also has some risks to the
| community.
| toomuchtodo wrote:
| These are reasonable questions, and as someone who is
| actively running an M&A infosec due diligence effort on
| the acquiring side (mentioned to demonstrate I am not
| naive to the effort involved), I'd be interested if
| Amazon even asked these questions or just said "fuck it
| turn it off we're done squeezing it for what it's worth."
| That last part is what I take issue with, and seeing it
| happen over and over is getting old.
|
| But I suppose if you mention the word "goodwill" to
| Amazon proper, the closest you'll get it someone seeing
| if it's something they sell on the retail side.
| shagie wrote:
| I _suspect_ they did (note that this layoff / closing
| was not part of the initial layoff round) and that the
| between then and now was considering those questions and
| their impact.
|
| I also suspect that when they got done answering the
| questions, it came out to be "the cost of trying to sell
| this to a responsible party and make all the changes to
| the site to remove integrations (using what is likely a
| demoralized division of the company) is much more than
| any possible gains or loss of goodwill."
| DeathArrow wrote:
| Hey, stop being mean to Jeff Bezos , Amazon only made
| $14,600,000,000 last year, how is it possible to feed your
| kids on that kind on money? Have a heart.There's just no
| way he could possibly keep DPReview going.
| nickthegreek wrote:
| Or sold it to someone who wanted to continue to run it.
| It's value could not have been zero.
| mynegation wrote:
| Amazon would probably spend more money on lawyers
| managing the sale than receive from the sale.
| alexvoda wrote:
| And spending some money in order to not destroy an
| important knowledge resource may be the right choice
| especially if the alternative means burning some good
| will.
| beefman wrote:
| I can't blame Amazon for stopping production on the site. I
| _can_ blame them for failing to host the existing content in
| perpetuity.
| canoebuilder wrote:
| > _I can't blame Amazon for stopping production on the
| site._
|
| But on the other hand, can't you? Where is the spirit today
| of someone like Carnegie, who said I'm going to take all
| this wealth and build thousands of free public libraries?
|
| Digital imagery in various forms is the predominant art
| form in this era, this site is a hub for many practitioners
| of digital imagery. Could Amazon not see it in themselves
| as one of the richest corporations ever to serve a patron
| role in the preservation and continued operation of this
| site? At the cost of a mere pittance in terms of their
| overall resources.
|
| It's also surprising to me that Amazon wouldn't see some
| level of self interest in that. Fewer people are buying
| these types of cameras, but more people than ever are
| consuming the media these types of cameras produce, on
| Amazon's platforms, platforms hosted on AWS, and elsewhere.
|
| There is definitely a value to the overall media ecosystem
| in keeping this resource alive. It might not be a highly
| quantifiable value, but that doesn't mean it is a low
| value, quite the opposite I would think.
|
| As others have said it just seems a bizarre, shortsighted
| action, that misses the big picture, coming out of the
| recent economic panic in the tech industry.
| stonemetal12 wrote:
| How does length of ownership have any bearing on quality of
| execution?
| layer8 wrote:
| I agree they didn't "run it into the ground", however the
| fact that they apparently didn't look for someone willing to
| take it over, requiring volunteers to cumbersomely scrape the
| site now in the short time it's still up, demonstrates a lack
| of caring at this point.
| alfalfasprout wrote:
| tbh I just find myself using amazon less and less. Sure, you
| can get what you want quickly. But unless I'm buying a name
| brand thing from the amazon store of that brand exactly I'm
| likely to get some knock off or deal with a dropshipper. In the
| case of a camera the warranty also matters and many sellers are
| grey market.
|
| Worse, when searching for an item without a specific brand (eg;
| the other day I wanted a drip watering system) I end up with
| whatever made up chinese company won the SEO fight that day.
| It'll be something like "JIYANG automatic drip watering system
| BRIGHT DISPLAY BEST WIFI solar with irrigation hose". Then 90%
| of the reviews will be for a pillow or some unrelated product
| because amazon allows changing the item to something totally
| different to farm good reviews. And the actual item will be
| some plasticky throwaway garbage.
| throwanem wrote:
| > I will go out of my way to be sure I never purchase a scrap
| of camera gear on Amazon again.
|
| If you're still making large-ticket purchases on Amazon and
| haven't yet gotten ripped off, you're amazingly lucky. I've
| been applying this rule since 2017, when I paid full retail for
| what turned out to be a gray-market (thus not covered by
| warranty) Nikon 200-500mm.
| snapetom wrote:
| Holy hell, this is true. Amazon is notorious for scammers.
| It's great if you want to buy a jug of dishwashing gel, but
| for anything risky like cameras, stick to a specialist. B&H
| is especially good with their fast and free shipping.
| mortenjorck wrote:
| While it's heartening to see the preservation community step up
| like this, I'm still left wondering what Amazon's alternatives
| might have been. Granted, finding a buyer would have likely been
| extremely tough in today's media landscape, and I have to imagine
| the site was losing money in recent years, yet I can't help but
| imagine some kind of leaner version of it sticking around.
|
| Maybe some of the long-time editors and contributors will still
| put something together. The hard part might actually be the site
| itself - something like Substack would be a poor fit compared to
| the highly-customized, product-centric architecture of DPReview.
| capableweb wrote:
| Cost of running a website like that is essentially everything
| but the actual infrastructure of keeping the HTML and data
| going across the wire. Since Amazon also runs AWS, they can
| essentially run the website for free (as they surely don't pay
| for traffic like the normal cloud-pleebs do).
|
| Stop updating the website but still leaving it online would
| have cost them a minimal amount of money but left them with
| infinitive amount of goodwill in the community compared to what
| they ended up doing.
| 1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote:
| <H1>403 ERROR</H1> <H2>The request could not be
| satisfied.</H2> <HR noshade size="1px"> Request
| blocked. We can't connect to the server for this app or
| website at this time. There might be too much traffic or a
| configuration error. Try again later, or contact the app or
| website owner. <BR clear="all"> If you provide
| content to customers through CloudFront, you can find steps to
| troubleshoot and help prevent this error by reviewing the
| CloudFront documentation.
| TheTechRobo wrote:
| Archive Team hasn't really done much yet - all they've done is
| an ArchiveBot job, which isn't getting anywhere because of
| DPReview's ratelimits, and some discovery scrapes. This is
| probably a different issue.
| 1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote:
| https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/DPReview
| nixass wrote:
| It would be hilarious if it was archived on S3
| k12sosse wrote:
| Just a reminder, you can donate to archive.org. [1]
|
| [1] https://archive.org/donate
| imwillofficial wrote:
| Is that the same as these guys?
|
| https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/Main_Page
| mellosouls wrote:
| No, the link above in the parent comment is misleading
| perhaps due to the misunderstanding about who is doing this -
| but the data will be stored there so it's a valid link.
|
| The donation link for the people doing the work appears to
| be:
|
| https://opencollective.com/archiveteam
|
| The get involved link is:
|
| https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/Who_We_Are
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-03-22 23:00 UTC)