31–40 of 279 posts
Cloudflare has a service for this now that will detect AI scrapers and send them to a tarpit of infinite AI generated nonsense pages.
Metabrainz is a great resource -- I wrote about them a few years ago here: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/06/organizing-public-inte... There's something important here in that a public good like Metabrainz would be fine with the AI bots picking up their content -- they're just doing it in a frustratingly inefficient way. It's a co-ordination problem: Metabrainz assumes good intent from bots, and has to lock down…
> They won't believe a random site when it says "Look, stop hitting our API, you can pick all of this data in one go, over in this gzipped tar file." What mechanism does a site have for doing that? I don't see anything in robots.txt standard about being able to set priority but I could be missing something.
In fact firefox now allows you to preview the link and get key points without ever going to the link[1]
Cloudflare has a service for this now that will detect AI scrapers and send them to a tarpit of infinite AI generated nonsense pages.
I'm not saying the API changes are pointless, but still, what's the catch?
Someone convinced me last time[0] that these aren't the well-known scrapers we know but other actors. We wouldn't be able to tell, certainly. I'd like to help the scrapers be better about reading my site, but I get why they aren't. I wish there were an established protocol for this. Say a $site/.well-known/machine-readable.json that instructs you on a handful of established software or allows pointing to an appropria…
https://metabrainz.org/datasets
Linked to from the homepage as “datasets”.
I may be too broadly interpreting what you mean by “machine-communicable” in the context of AI scraping though.
Nothing prevents scraper from creating a free account and sending auth token in API requests. I'm not saying the API changes are pointless, but still, what's the catch?
Someone convinced me last time[0] that these aren't the well-known scrapers we know but other actors. We wouldn't be able to tell, certainly. I'd like to help the scrapers be better about reading my site, but I get why they aren't. I wish there were an established protocol for this. Say a $site/.well-known/machine-readable.json that instructs you on a handful of established software or allows pointing to an appropria…
Why does there have to be a "machine-communicable way"? If these developers cared about such things they would spend 20 seconds looking at this page. It's literally one of the first links when you Google "metabrainz"
the more time passes the more i'm convinced that the solution is to—somehow—force everyone to have to go through something like common crawl i don't want people's servers to be pegged at 100% because a stupid dfs scraper is exhaustively traversing their search facets, but i also want the web to remain scrapable by ordinary people, or rather go back to how readily scrapable it used to be before the invention of cloudf…
1) Cut copyright to 15-20 years by default. You can have 1 extension of an additional 10-15 years if you submit your work to the "National Data Set" within say 2-3 years of the initial publication.
2) Content in the National set is well categorized and cleaned up. It's the cleanest data set anyone could want. The data set is used both to train some public models and also licensed out to people wanting to train their own models. Both the public models and the data sets are licensed for nominal fees.
3) People who use the public models or data sets as part of their AI system are granted immunity from copyright violation claims for content generated by these models, modulo some exceptions for knowing and intentional violations (e.g. generating the contents of a book into an epub). People who choose to scrape their own data are subject to the current state of the law with regards to both scraping and use (so you probably better be buying a lot of books).
4) The license fees generated from licensing the data and the models would be split into royalty payments to people whose works are in the dataset, and are still under copyright protection, proportional to the amount of data submitted and inversely proportional to the age of that data. There would be some absolute caps in place to prevent slamming the national data sets with junk data just to pump the numbers.
Everyone gets something out of this. AI folks get clean data, that they didn't have to burn a lot of resources scraping. Copyright holders get paid for their works used by AI and retain most of the protections they have today, just for a shorter time), the public gets usable AI tooling without everyone spending their own resources on building their own data sets, site owners and the like get reduced bot/scraping traffic. It's not perfect, and I'm sure the devil is in the details, but that's the nature of this sort of thing.
At some point they must become more cost efficient by pure market economics mechanisms. That implies less load on sites. Much of the scraping that I see is still very dumb/repetative. Like Googlebot in like 2001. (Blocking Chinese IP ranges with the help of some geoip db helps a lot in the short term. Azure as a whole is the second largest source of pure idiocy.)
They seem to have so much bubble money at the moment that the cost of scraping is probably a rounding error in their pocket change.