this post was submitted on 21 Feb 2026
204 points (99.5% liked)

News

36018 readers
2259 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 32 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] VitoRobles@lemmy.today 19 points 23 hours ago

In emails sent to Patokallio after the DDoS began, “Nora” from Archive.today threatened to create a public association between Patokallio’s name and AI porn and to create a gay dating app with Patokallio’s name. These threats were discussed by Wikipedia editors in their deliberations over whether to blacklist Archive.today, and then editors noticed that Patokallio’s name had been inserted into some Archive.today captures of webpages.

“Honestly, I’m kind of in shock,” one editor wrote. “Just to make sure I’m understanding the implications of this: we have good reason to believe that the archive.today operator has tampered with the content of their archives, in a manner that suggests they were trying to further their position against the person they are in dispute with???”

That and their refusal to talk to any journalist who references information about Patokallio’s blog makes archive.today unreliable.

Fuck them.

[–] ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com 46 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Absolute dumbass. Truly a self-own for the ages.

Play stupid games, ...

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 7 points 1 day ago

Collect insurance?

[–] DougHolland@lemmy.world 27 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Crap. Obviously, I'm gonna gotta stop using archive.today, but it's the only way around paywalls at numerous sites.

Removepaywalls.com (plural) inserts ads, often for shady operations.

Removepaywall.com (singular) usually works, but it's tricky sharing the links (i.e., "choose option 2" or "choose option 4").

Byebyepaywall.com has old, dead options.

Wayback Machine bombs out a lot.

And ghostarchive.org is successful so rarely it's really a last resort.

Anyone know of any others?

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 7 points 18 hours ago

The thing that has always annoyed me about archive.is is that using Firefox + VPN seems to result in endless Captcha. But works in Chrome, go figure. I'm very suspicious of sites that somehow only work properly under Chrome.

[–] Trudge@piefed.social 25 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Possibly irrelevant, but some browsers have a "reading mode" which, in conjunction with the ol' Hitting F11 and Then Esc Trick, will produce the whole article before a paywall can finish loading.

[–] zqps@sh.itjust.works 5 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

F11 plus Esc stops script execution or something like that?

[–] Trudge@piefed.social 3 points 15 hours ago

reloads the page & aborts loading the page

[–] DougHolland@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Worth looking into, thanks.

[–] AmbitiousProcess@piefed.social 34 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Here's the relevant archive.today guidance page on Wikipedia for anyone curious:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Archive.today_guidance

If you have a Wikipedia account, you can help replace these links!
Go to the How you can help section, then click on the search links for any of the given domains, and you can go and manually re-archive any links with Archive.org, Ghostarchive, or Megalodon.

[–] SourDrink@lemmy.world 27 points 1 day ago

I half thought this was archive.org they were blacklisting. Two whole different sites.

[–] paraphrand@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Is there a reason self hosted paywall bypass tools don’t exist? Is it because these services pay for access?

[–] deceiver@infosec.pub 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] paraphrand@lemmy.world 7 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

At first glance, this does not bypass paywalls. It archives web pages.

People conflate the two services because some of them bypass paywalls as they archive.

I specifically asked for about paywall bypass on purpose.

[–] deceiver@infosec.pub 5 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

the archiving mechanism itself is what bypasses paywalls. it archives by fetching pages server-side before client-side JavaScript enforces paywalls

[–] paraphrand@lemmy.world 2 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

Can this be done in a browser extension? I’m basically wondering why people don’t tell other people about Paywall bypass software on Lemmy. Is it because it sucks? Doesn’t exist?

Such software seems like it would be very Lemmy, and very Linux, and very piracy, and very anarchic. So why am I not already aware of any?

[–] deceiver@infosec.pub 5 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

it absolutely can! there’s Bypass Paywalls Clean developed by magnolia1234. the reason you don’t see them shared often is that they’re repeatedly taken down from official extension stores like the Chrome Web Store and Firefox Add-ons, and platforms like GitHub, due to legal and political pressure from publishers, which pushes them to increasingly obscure and/or questionable hosting platforms that most normal users wouldn’t touch - case in point, Bypass Paywalls Clean itself is currently hosted on GitFlic, a Russian code hosting platform, as it’s been pushed outside the reach of Western legal frameworks

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 2 points 18 hours ago

You'd think they would host on codeberg.

[–] hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I think a subscribed user of the news site has to upload the "unlocked" article to the archive website.

[–] deceiver@infosec.pub 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

no, archive.today (and similar services like the Wayback Machine) work by fetching the page directly through their own servers, essentially acting as a headless browser that renders the page and saves a snapshot. the archive service itself makes the HTTP request, executes JavaScript, and captures the resulting document object model - no subscriber involvement required

[–] hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 17 hours ago

Ah I see, thanks for the correction!

[–] paraphrand@lemmy.world 2 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 children)

So there is no subscriber at all? How do they get past the wall that requires the payment?

It’s fun how I got a few replies, and none of the answered my very precise question.

[–] deceiver@infosec.pub 2 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

soft paywalls are enforced by JavaScript running in your browser - the server sends the full article content regardless, and then the JavaScript checks if you’re a subscriber and hides or blocks it if not. when archive.today or a self-hosted tool like ArchiveBox fetches the page, it gets the full content directly from the server before any of that JavaScript enforcement runs. the server doesn’t know or care whether you’re a subscriber, it just responds to the request

[–] paraphrand@lemmy.world 2 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Thanks!

I always assumed that wasn’t the case because Paywall bypass extensions are not linked in a reply when someone screams about paywalls in a thread on Reddit or Lemmy. Why is that possible, but not possible with a browser extension?

Are soft paywalls uncommon?

[–] Fiery@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 18 hours ago

Soft paywalls only exist on badly made sites (which make up a large part of all sites so it's still more effective than it has any right to be).

Many news sites with paywalls have a proper hard paywall. The only way to get around those is with an account or with an exploit. Neither of those two are going to be published for use in an extension though (as it'd get deactivated very fast).

[–] daychilde@lemmy.world 20 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Dammit. Everyone's been using that site to get around paywalls because it works well. Now I have to go find another one that works as well. :|

[–] betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.world 24 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There are others that don't DDoS blogs.

[–] daychilde@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Well, yes, I'll be off looking for them next time I need to use an archival site. I'm bummed to learn this crap about archive.ph.

[–] dan@upvote.au 12 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

It works well because they use paid accounts to scrape a bunch of paywalled sites, which is why publishers are trying to figure out who runs it.

It's completely untrustworthy now that they've shown that they can (and do) edit archived pages.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Arguably the biggest problem with Wikipedia as it aged is the accumulation of dead links.

Brilliant move.

[–] SolacefromSilence@fedia.io 4 points 1 day ago

I used to find dead links annoying until I realized that many dead links are also saved in the wayback machine. This comment isn't only about Wikipedia.

[–] dan@upvote.au 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Why do you need an archive of Wikipedia though? Each page retains its entire history, so you can easily go back to old versions without using a third-party site (especially one that DDoSes people)

Wikimedia also provide downloads of the whole of Wikipedia, including page history. You can easily have your own copy of the entirety of Wikipedia if you want to, as long as you've got enough disk space and patience to download it.

Edit: I'm an idiot but I'm leaving this comment here. I didn't realise you meant dead links on Wikipedia, not to Wikipedia.