previously <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46624740">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46624740</a>
See also <a href="https://archive-is.tumblr.com/post/806832066465497088/ladies-and-gentlemen-in-the-autumn-of-2025-i" rel="nofollow">https://archive-is.tumblr.com/post/806832066465497088/ladies...</a><p>also <i>Archive.today: on the trail of mysterious guerrilla archivists of the Internet</i> - <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37009598">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37009598</a> August 2023
Interestingly, theres an account in that thread <i>claiming</i> to be from Gyrovague, but its not the same one thats in <i>this thread</i>, which has been confirmed to be legit as it is mentioned by name in this latest Gyrovague article.<p>I wonder, is the newer gyrovague-com account because they lost the login for the old one? or was the old one a different person? Hopefully they can clarify, because if there's an account pretending to be them that makes this story even more confusingly weird.
Macroexpanded: <i>Ask HN: Weird archive.today behavior?</i> - <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46624740">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46624740</a> - Jan 2026 (69 comments)<p>I cannot make head or tail of this but it's more fascinating than the usual internecine bloodbath.
It is academically very interesting to think about this in light of their long-standing dispute with Cloudflare (<a href="https://community.cloudflare.com/t/archive-is-error-1001/18227" rel="nofollow">https://community.cloudflare.com/t/archive-is-error-1001/182...</a>) over EDNS, which could have privacy implications attached.<p>I think no matter how you slice it though, it's unethical and reprehensible to coordinate (even a shoddy) DDoS leveraging your visitors as middlemen. This is effectively coordinating a botnet, and we shouldn't condone this behavior as a community.
It's definitely interesting to see this roll around since the only individuals that see the CAPCHA page mentioned, are users of Cloudflare's DNS services (knowingly or not).<p>P.S. Shout-out to dang for dropping the flags. I have a small suspicion that their may be some foul play, given the contents...
Why is this flagged?<p>Given the content, I find this suspicious.
I didnt flag the article, but anecdotally, I was initially unable to load the article at all. It mentions how it ended up in an adblock list. The article makes it sound like this is a good thing, as it stops the DDOS, but it isn't preventing people from loading the page directly. That may be true for people using an adblocking extension, but my adblocking DNS seems to be blocking it based on that same list. I had to manually tweak my dns-based adblocker to allow the domain in order to read the article.
I looked at the flags and they seem to be legit flags from legit users. My guess is that they thought this was below-the-radar drama that wasn't on topic for HN. (I could make a "people who flagged X also flagged" list a la <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46771900">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46771900</a> to support the point, but it's a time-consuming pain so I'd rather not!)<p>Edit: after looking at this more closely, I have a counterintuitive (to me at least) take: I think this is interesting enough to transcend the usual categories. That is, we'd normally downweight this kind of post off the frontpage - but in this case there are so many unusual variables that the usual rules don't apply.<p>I say this despite having zero clue what's going on here. We do have a nose for what the HN community might find interesting (we'd bloody well better after doing this job for so long), so let's override the flags and see what happens.<p>But without relitigating WWII please.
[flagged]
… seems like we the HN community should find a new site to mirror with.
gyrovague-com: posted this thread, claims to own the blog<p>gyrovague: claimed to own the blog in the last thread<p>rabinovich: posted last thread linking to gyrovague.com, identifying the owner as... well... "Masha Rabinovich"<p>I believe these accounts are all connected.
> Well, I wish I had one, but at this stage I really don’t. The most charitable interpretation would be that the investigative heat is starting to get to the webmaster and they’re lashing out in misguided self-defense.<p>I don't think they're lashing out in self-defense. This is a harmless way for them to get attention, which is what they're desparate for because the FBI is after them at the behest of Bezos and other billionaires who control the paywalled media and don't like archive.today's role in making them accessible. The only thing that could possibly save them (though it almost certainly won't), is gathering as many eyeballs as possible from the people who <i>like</i> the service. HN having a super high concentration of those. Almost every paywalled post here has an archive.today link in the comments.<p>That's also why they posted about it on HN, explicitly under that name. To get HN eyeballs.<p>It's intentionally harmless because, as you confirmed, it's not costing you any money or resources.
[flagged]
[flagged]
Please, let's not re-fight WWII on HN.<p>We know that the impact from that time is far from worked through, but to the extent it shows up here, commenters should make the effort not to fall back into war mode.<p>You're welcome on HN, and so are the users you disagree with—but you all (i.e. we all) need to stay within the site guidelines when discussing tough stuff. These include: "<i>Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.</i>" -
<a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html">https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html</a><p>p.s. This comment is not just for the user I'm replying to but everyone else who's expressing strong feelings below. It's amazing, and totally human, how alive these feelings are after 80+ years, but at the same time, 80+ years of distance should give us the ability to relate to each other a little bit better than our grandfathers and great-grandfathers were able to.
> <i>Finland was one of Germany's most important allies in the attack on the Soviet Union, allowing German troops to be based in Finland before the attack and joining in the attack on the USSR almost immediately.</i><p>I wonder, why on earth would Finland have any hostility towards the USSR in 1941? It beggars belief!
OP here. I obviously registered to post my own blog entry.<p>You might also want to read your own link:<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad#Finnish_participation" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad#Finnish_par...</a>
> OP here<p>Can you clear up the confusion as to whether or not the earlier user named 'gyrovague' is operated by you as well? (There was some suspicion on the earlier thread that it <i>might not be</i> you.)<p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=gyrovague">https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=gyrovague</a>
Finland did send hundreds of people to be murdered in Nazi concentration camps.
No, it did not. Unless you count the Soviet POWs who were murdered in Stalin's gulags.<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_Finland#World_War_II" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_Finland...</a>
Finland starved thousands to death in it's own camps. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Karelian_concentration_camps" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Karelian_concentration_ca...</a>
No, Finland handed both jewish and non-jewish Soviet POWs to Germany. Hundreds of people sent from Finland to Germany died in the camps. Finland also deported multiple jewish refugees to Germany, these people were neither Soviets nor POWs.<p><a href="https://journal.fi/haik/article/view/139103/86888" rel="nofollow">https://journal.fi/haik/article/view/139103/86888</a><p>Yes, sure, Finland had it's own complicated reasons for behaving the way it did. There's however no serious dispute about whether or not Finnish collaboration in the holocaust happened.
OTOH, after trying to conquer Finland in 1939-1940 Russians definitely have no moral right to judge Finns.
Could it be that Germany was the only nation willing to help Finland fight the Soviets?<p>From Wikipedia<p>> Interim peace
> ...
> Defensive arrangements were attempted with Sweden and the United Kingdom, but the political and military situation in the context of the Second World War rendered these efforts fruitless. Finland then turned to Nazi Germany for military aid.<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finland_in_World_War_II" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finland_in_World_War_II</a>
This is the blog of a guy who for whatever reason is trying to dox the owner of archive.today<p>It's a shame the DDoS isn't working.<p>OTOH, this all looks so silly it might as well be the archive.today operator trying to push fake dox on themselves.