Re:FBI tries to unmask owner of archive.is
by didibus on Thursday November 06, 2025 @12:38PM
(#45837874)
archive.is is a charity no? Or at least they take donations, it seems the legal entity behind it is nebulous, but they don't have ads and have no paid product or offering.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:FBI tries to unmask owner of archive.is
by hoistbypetard on Thursday November 06, 2025 @01:20PM
(#45838452)
They sure as shit do have ads. Have you ever accidentally followed a link using a browser profile that has no ad blocking enabled?
I only rarely browse without some form of content blocking (usually privacy-focused... that takes care of enough ads for me, most of the time). I keep a browser profile that's got no customizations at all, though, for verifying that bugs I see/want to report are not related to one of my extensions.
Every once in a while, I'll accidentally open a link to a news site (or to an archive of such a site) in that vanilla profile. I'm shocked at how many ads you see if you don't take some counter measures.
I just confirmed in that profile: archive.is definitely puts ads around the sites they've archived.
Re:FBI tries to unmask owner of archive.is
by didibus on Friday November 07, 2025 @12:33PM
(#45848774)
I stand corrected, maybe it's because I have ad-blocks that I never noticed.
And arguably I used to think it was the Internet Archive.
It does make this case seem problematic now that I know the details.