Live data from Hacker News

Web Scraping in 2016

franciskim.co

191–200 of 402 posts

Re: Web Scraping in 2016

#191
post #179

I do a significant amount of scraping for hobby projects, albeit mostly open websites. As a result, I've gotten pretty good a circumventing rate-limiting and most other controls. I suspect I'm one of those bad people your parents tell you to avoid - by that I mean I completely ignore robots.txt. At this point, my architecture has settled on a distributed RPC system with a rotating swarm of clients. I use RabbitMQ for…

How can I get ahold of you directly?

connorw at imaginaryindustries dot com

Re: Web Scraping in 2016

#192
post #158
post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's go with a more apt analogy: If you're entering a country, do its laws not apply to you until you've seen a copy of them? "Oh, sorry, no one told me theft is illegal here. Where does it say that? Oh, I see. Okay. I'll stop now. Thanks for letting me know." If you cross the border without necessary documents, does that country have no right to detain you, simply because you haven't checked the laws? Just because…

Country's laws are a bit different, simply because a country has virtually absolute legal power over its territory. Countries can and do punish people for breaking laws that one cannot feasibly know they were breaking. Does any human know all the laws in the United States? Would that even be physically possible?

There's some interesting science fiction opportunities here. When you open a connect to a site then all traffic over that connection is subject to the jurisdiction of the ToS for that site regardless of disclosure.

Also we don't even know how many laws there are in the United States for I'd say knowing the content is impossible.

Re: Web Scraping in 2016

#193
post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, search engines are scrapers. No need to make a distinction. Second, search engines don't always respect robots.txt. They sometimes do. Even Google itself says it may still contact a page that has disallowed it. [0] Third, robots.txt is just a convention. There's no reason to assume it has any binding authority. Users should be able to access public HTTP resources with any non-disruptive HTTP client, regardless…

And the original point of my comment was that doing this is extremely rude and not appropriate, not that it couldn't be done or that others weren't doing it. Feel free to send any request to any server you want, it is certainly up to them to decide whether or not to serve it, but that doesnt absolve you of guilt from scraping someone's site when they explicitly ask you not to.

Please don't conflate "extremely rude", "not appropriate", and "guilt". Two of these are subjective opinions about what constitutes good citizenship. The last one is a legal determination that has the potential to deprive an individual of both his money and liberty. We're discussing whether these behaviors should be legal, not whether they are necessarily polite.

Re: Web Scraping in 2016

#194
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Scraping against the TOS is super bad netizen stuff, and I dont think people should be posting positive reviews of people doing this. Breaking captchas and the like is basically blackhat work and should be looked down upon, not congratulated as I see in this thread. Not really. Scraping, in my opinion, isn't black hat unless you are actually affecting their service or stealing info. If you are slamming the site with…

> If you throttle your scraper in proportion to the size of their site, you aren't really harming them. And do you understand their site infrastructure to know whether you're doing harm? It's perfectly possible that your script somehow bypasses safeguards they had in place to deal with heavy usage, and now their database is locking unnecessarily.

One fair baseline is whether or not the custom User Agent you're using to scrape has request timing that's on the order of what a fast human visitor might do. If the site can't handle that, it's certainly not the UA's fault.

Re: Web Scraping in 2016

#195

I do a significant amount of scraping for hobby projects, albeit mostly open websites. As a result, I've gotten pretty good a circumventing rate-limiting and most other controls. I suspect I'm one of those bad people your parents tell you to avoid - by that I mean I completely ignore robots.txt. At this point, my architecture has settled on a distributed RPC system with a rotating swarm of clients. I use RabbitMQ for…

I'm sure there'd be a ton of people that would love to pay to use your platform (who cares if the source is available, I don't want to run my own because once the code is written, it's ops thats hard). But then I suppose it would be hard to stay unnoticed.

Yeah, running this thing publicly would be a huge mess from a copyright perspective, since it literally re-hosts everything as a core part of how it works.

As it is, I think I'm OK, since it's basically just a "website DVR" type thing, for my own use.

Really, if nothing else, the project has been enormously educational for me. I've learnt a boatload about distributed systems, learned a bit of SQL, dicked about with databases a bunch, and actually experienced deploying a complex multi-component application across multiple disparate data centers.

Re: Web Scraping in 2016

#196

Keep in mind that companies have sued for scraping not through the API, for example LinkedIn, which explicitly prevents scraping via the ToS: http://www.informationweek.com/software/social/linkedin-sues... OKCupid did a DMCA takedown for researchers releasing scraped data: https://www.engadget.com/2016/05/17/publicly-released-okcupi... Since both of these incidents, I now only scrape if it's a) through the API follow…

Obviously it's a good idea to follow TOS. But as a practical matter, they have to know that you're doing it before they can take action. You wouldn't want to put up a site announcing that you're selling scraped LinkedIn data, for example. But if that data is valuable to your business - collecting names of people that work in certain positions at certain companies so that you can do targeted snail mail campaigns for e…

This only goes so far, and if you get found out, you're looking at willful infringement (which usually triples damages) and probably criminal charges under the CFAA. However, it should be acknowledged that there are many people making quiet livings off scrapes that are not legal. There are even a few companies making loud livings off such scrapes, like Google.

If you're not going to run it totally anonymously, you should be prepared to jettison and repackage it when you get found it (so that you appear to be complying with the C&D).

Scraping is a huge part of the web, and everyone does it. It sucks that it has to live underground because only big companies can duke it out in court.

Re: Web Scraping in 2016

#198
post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Search engines respect robots.txt – not sure many scrapers do.

First, search engines are scrapers. No need to make a distinction. Second, search engines don't always respect robots.txt. They sometimes do. Even Google itself says it may still contact a page that has disallowed it. [0] Third, robots.txt is just a convention. There's no reason to assume it has any binding authority. Users should be able to access public HTTP resources with any non-disruptive HTTP client, regardless…

Google will put forbidden pages in its index. It doesn't scrape them. (The URL to the page exists even without visiting the page.)

Re: Web Scraping in 2016

#199
post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instagram or Facebook, they thrive on stolen or relinked content and monetize it day in day out. Being amazed at this kind of bad behaviour where the targets are some of the most despicable companies on the web is a bit ironic. Scrape away, these companies hurt the web, let's hurt them (even though, all the scraping in the world won't have any impact).

So its moral to continue bad behavior because someone else did it?

It's not bad behavior. The companies that profit off this try to make you think it's bad behavior because they don't want to risk your taking any profit away, and they've installed laws that let them get away with this. They can violate to their heart's content, but unless someone else in the oligopoly sues over the matter (which they would never do, because the precedent may prevent their abuse of the law), the peons will be forced to comply. That's not how a competitive marketplace works, and it's why we have such a hard time breaking gridlock on web properties.

Re: Web Scraping in 2016

#200

Keep in mind that companies have sued for scraping not through the API, for example LinkedIn, which explicitly prevents scraping via the ToS: http://www.informationweek.com/software/social/linkedin-sues... OKCupid did a DMCA takedown for researchers releasing scraped data: https://www.engadget.com/2016/05/17/publicly-released-okcupi... Since both of these incidents, I now only scrape if it's a) through the API follow…

It would be ok if it wasn't "You can't scrap my site. Unless of course you're Google" this double standard drives me mad.
Post reply on HN