

Internet Archive's S.F. office damaged in fire - louhong
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Internet-Archive-s-S-F-office-damaged-in-fire-4960703.php

======
sillysaurus2
Let me second this sentiment: YAY!

My stomach dropped when I heard the news. I was so relieved to see that
archive.org still loads, and to hear that there was no data loss. It's become
a ridiculously irreplaceable tool in my daily workflow.

You found an interesting tutorial/article/paper written in 1995 but it fails
to load when you follow the URL? Internet archive that shiz.

An author has edited his webpage, and you're curious what it used to look
like? Internet archive that shiz.

Have a PDF link, but it's not loading? Check the archive. More often than not,
it will load.

If I remember correctly, I once recovered a ~1MB zip file from there as well.
The zip file had disappeared from the normal web, but thankfully archive had
snagged it. Maybe it was a PDF though.

It seems impossible for the internet archive to persist forever... But it also
seems about as valuable as the Library of Alexandria was in its day. Or
rather, future historians will find it as valuable. So I hope we can get
triple redundancy for it.

~~~
zz1
Let me second this sentiment: NO!

Just like you, when I first read about it, I was worried, but then I hoped
something serious had happened.

Why? Well, I like the Internet Archive like any other of us here does, but I
am worried about his model: centralization. This time nothing happend, fine,
but something actually __can __happen, someday. I just think that the "Better
shut it down, NOW!" theory[0] also applies to the Internet Archive, and I hope
I that one day I'll see a new one, federative and distributed.

[0]: [https://torrentfreak.com/shut-down-the-pirate-bay-founder-
sa...](https://torrentfreak.com/shut-down-the-pirate-bay-founder-says-130708/)

~~~
sillysaurus2
... would you say the same about the Library of Alexandria? What would you
have suggested they do? Not kept a library?

You should play some poker. It'll give a healthy respect for how much odds can
affect outcomes. Shocking situations will happen, but half the time you'll be
the one doing the shocking. Often you can win with just a pair of 8's. Based
on your attitude, it seems like you'd always choose to fold if you were only
holding 8 8, but in reality it's sometimes worth it to call.

Your expected value by not playing at all, though, is zero. Meaning you won't
lose, but you won't win either. This only makes sense when you're satisfied
with your environment as it exists today.

I wouldn't be satisfied without the internet archive. It serves a vital
function. They may be gambling against natural disasters, but you know what?
They're still winning. And by choosing to play, they've improved our world a
bit. We should be grateful, not scornful.

~~~
zz1
You surely don't see my point.

Read the link? Thought about the difference between books (paper) and data
(bits)? Also the example you chose shows the problem with centralization.
Never said "better off without the Internet Archive" but "I'd be happier with
an improved one, but the existence of the present one puts everybody in a
comfort zone".

~~~
JohnHaugeland
There's a lot more to it than the technical issue. Humans have to do the work.

Putting it on a warez distribution network doesn't get the scanning done, etc.

~~~
zz1
Why should one exclude the other? I talk about "improvements", not a random
chosen word.

Also I scanned a lot of books myself, and scanners can easily go trivial over
the next decade.

[http://www.diybookscanner.org/](http://www.diybookscanner.org/)
[http://diybookscanner.eu/](http://diybookscanner.eu/)

And humans may even be not that necessary anymore
[http://www.lib.umich.edu/events/automatic-book-scanning-
desi...](http://www.lib.umich.edu/events/automatic-book-scanning-designing-
linear-book-scanner-google)

~~~
JohnHaugeland
I'm not saying anything needs to be excluded.

However, there is a human tragedy here, for people who have done good work for
us, and we want to help out.

If you don't want to, that's your prerogative.

I'm glad that you've scanned books and released them. Maybe scanners will
become trivial; you might be right. They aren't there yet, though, and I feel
like I owe these people a debt, to help.

I'm not telling you what to do or think. I'm just answering why I think
there's more to the issue than that there could be a centralized storage, and
that in the future maybe it gets easier to do.

Sometimes when there's a fire you just put some money in the hat to help,
buddy. It's more about compassion than anything.

Thanks for hearing me out.

------
IvyMike
If you've ever considered donating, today would be a good day.

[https://archive.org/donate/](https://archive.org/donate/)

I just did for the first time.

Edit: The site appears to be overloaded, so if you have trouble donating,
please try again later.

------
drtse4
Didn't knew where the central office was until a few weeks ago, here is a
nicely done documentary that shows what's inside the former church that now
hosts the internet archive:
[http://vimeo.com/groups/17441/videos/59207751](http://vimeo.com/groups/17441/videos/59207751)

~~~
gojomo
FYI, the scanning/'reading room' areas shown in that video from about 8m25s to
8m50s are in the building that appears totally lost to last night's fire.

The blinky servers at the back of the large 'church hall', shown at the
beginning (~0m45s-on) with concrete walls around them, are about as far from
the fire area as is possible on the lot.

The other green-walled server room, shown starting at 5m01s, is in a non-
concrete office-like room closer to where the fire was.

------
ToastyMallows
> The fire is not believed to have caused major disruption to the website. No
> data were stored at the San Francisco site.

Yay!

EDIT: Also glad no one was injured.

~~~
gojomo
That "no data were stored at the San Francisco site" wording is a bit
misleading.

There's tons of data at the Archive's SF headquarters - but the dedicated
storage systems are in the building adjacent to where the fire was contained,
from the photos I've seen.

It could have been much, much worse.

------
_delirium
More detailed story, with some photos and video:
[http://richmondsfblog.com/2013/11/06/part-of-internet-
archiv...](http://richmondsfblog.com/2013/11/06/part-of-internet-archive-
building-badly-burned-in-early-morning-fire/)

~~~
_delirium
They now have a post themselves: [http://blog.archive.org/2013/11/06/scanning-
center-fire-plea...](http://blog.archive.org/2013/11/06/scanning-center-fire-
please-help-rebuild/)

------
sp332
Here's a picture of what's left of the office:
[https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BYZUtBdCUAAW6ey.jpg:large](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BYZUtBdCUAAW6ey.jpg:large)
and another [https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BYZzCHYCAAA-
WGA.jpg:large](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BYZzCHYCAAA-WGA.jpg:large) These
are apparently from @hollyquan of KCBS News.

Edit: originally said "building" but it was just one of the offices in the
building.

~~~
britta
That's not the main part of the building - here are pictures with more
context: [http://richmondsfblog.com/2013/11/06/part-of-internet-
archiv...](http://richmondsfblog.com/2013/11/06/part-of-internet-archive-
building-badly-burned-in-early-morning-fire/)

------
schenecstasy
They don't have a backup office?

~~~
MrZongle2
They've got quite a few snapshots of one, but they're missing a few of the
back rooms.

