Before we enumerate use cases, we can state\u00a0some initial indications of a problem.<\/p>\n
Whether links fail because of DDoS attacks<\/b>, censorship<\/b>, or just plain old link rot<\/b>, dead links are a problem for Internet users everywhere.<\/p>\n
This isn’t a new problem (W3C – Cool URIs don’t change<\/a>).<\/p>\n 49%<\/span> of links in Supreme court\u00a0opinions are dead<\/b> 136,312<\/span> Wikipedia articles contain dead<\/b> external links Some initiatives, such as the Internet Archive<\/a>, Perma.cc<\/a>, and Memento<\/a>, are attempting to snapshot and preserve the Internet and provide seamless access to those snapshots.<\/p>\n But more and more, just a handful of centralized entities host information online. Online centralization creates “choke points” that can restrict access to web content.<\/p>\n This Community Group intends to pursue complementary solutions to missing online content\u00a0from various\u00a0angles:<\/p>\n The more routes we provide to information, the more all people can freely share that information, even in the face of filtering or blockages.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Before we enumerate use cases, we can state\u00a0some initial indications of a problem. Whether links fail because of DDoS attacks, censorship, or just plain old link rot, dead links are a problem for Internet users everywhere. This isn’t a new … Continue reading
\nNYT – In Supreme Court Opinions, Web Links to Nowhere<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\nWikipedia – Category:All articles with dead external links<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n