Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by dragonwriter 3610 days ago
Doesn't really explain why they have to nuke it, even if it is the current site owner. Respecting robots.txt is one thing, but that just means not spidering and archiving the content that is now there. Deleting already archived material based on later changes to robots.txt is a non-obvious behavior, given the usual understanding of the general meaning of robots.txt.
1 comments
aab0 3610 days ago
They're not deleting it, just hiding it from public access. Once the squatter goes away, the content comes back.
link
J_Darnley 3610 days ago
What's the difference? Both make this feature (and more general use of the archive) useless.
link
aab0 3606 days ago
The difference is exactly what I said: if they deleted it, it's gone forever. If they hide it, it can come back. I've seen pages I cite disappear for a year or two thanks to scummy squatters - but they came back! It's the difference between being sentenced to execution and to 1 year of prison.
link