Archive.org is awful. It allows site owners and random third parties to edit old archived pages.
Archive.today does not.
At least site owners have the copyright on the pages that Archive.org saves. They can just get the content pulled through DMCA anyway.
The operator of archive.today (presumably one, at most a handful of people) can edit archived pages on archive.today
Literally anyone can edit archived pages on archive.org.
There are literally at least hundreds of thousands of tampered archives on archive.org. How is that not worse than the couple of tampered archives on archive.today?
Not true
>Archive.org is awful. It allows site owners and random third parties to edit old archived pages.
Also not true. However, Archive.today edits archived pages itself.
Do you actually mean edit or do you just mean delete
Both are problematic, but falsifying a historic record is orders of magnitude worse than deleting one, and conflating them would be extremely dishonest
