Too bad just Internet Archive isn't enough, we also need anarchists like ArchiveTeam to actually mirror all the things, not just the things that agree to be mirrored.

Internet Archive generally allow websites to control if they get indexed/mirrored or not, via the robots.txt, so websites can decide for themselves.

Luckily, we have other grassroots movements like ArchiveTeam that doesn't care and archives anything deemed valuable to be archived, website owners be damned.

IA have increasingly ignored robots.txt since the mid-2010s, going on at least eight years now:

<https://blog.archive.org/2017/04/17/robots-txt-meant-for-sea...>

<https://blog.archive.org/2016/12/17/robots-txt-gov-mil-websi...>

> Too bad just Internet Archive isn't enough, we also need anarchists like ArchiveTeam to actually mirror all the things, not just the things that agree to be mirrored.

No? This is wrong? The site owner is the person who morally decides whether their site should get mirrored or not.

It's stuff like this that makes me actively cheer forward otherwise-harmful things like Google's web attestation efforts.

Disagree. They gave up a legitimate moral claim when they posted whatever on the public facing internet.

The EU disagrees with you with its "right to be forgotten".

Alternatively - you make an excellent case for the paywalling of vast swaths of the internet.

> As long as non-profits like the Internet Archive exist, the probability is higher.

No, as good as it is, the Internet Archive in a single point of failure. Which was put on stark display when they decided a few years ago to pick a legal fight over copyright that they could never win and that put their organization at risk.

Also, I've tried to use the Internet Archive to grab Facebook posts. It doesn't work, even for public ones (all I got was pages and pages of the Facebook login screen).