Live data from Hacker News

Sacrificing accessibility for not getting web scraped

tilschuenemann.de

1–10 of 44 posts

Re: Sacrificing accessibility for not getting web scraped

#3
Congratulations, I guess? I can't read your content. But ... The machines can't either, so ... great job!

Although... Hmm! I just pasted it into Claude and got:

When text content gets scraped from the web, and used for ever-increasing training data to improve. Copyright laws get broken, content gets addressively scraped, and even though you might have deleted your original work, it might must show up because it got cached or archived at some point. Now, if you subscribe to the idea that your content shouldn't be used for training, you don't have much say. I wondered how I personally would mitigate this on a technical level. et tu, caesar? In my linear algebra class we discussed the caesar cipher[1] as a simple encryption algorithm: Every character gets shifted by n characters. If you know (or guess) the shift, you can figure out the original text. Brute force or character heuristics break this easily. But we can apply this substitution more generally to a font! A font contains a cmap (character map), which maps codepoints and glyphs. A codepoint defines the character, or complex symbol, and the glyph represents the visual shape. We scramble the font's codepoint-glyph-mapping, and adjust the text with the inverse of the scramble, so it stays intact for our readers. It displays correctly, but the inspected (or scraped) HTML stays scrambled. Theoretically, you could apply a different scramble to each request. This works as long as scrapers don't use OCR for handling edge cases like this, but I don't think it would be feasible. I also tested if ChatGPT could decode a ciphertext if I'd tell it that a substitution cipher was used, and after some back and forth, it gave me the result: "One day Alice went down a rabbit hole,

How accurate is this?

Did you seriously just make things worse for screen reader users and not even ... verify ... it worked to make things worse for AI?

Re: Sacrificing accessibility for not getting web scraped

#7
post #3

Congratulations, I guess? I can't read your content. But ... The machines can't either, so ... great job! Although... Hmm! I just pasted it into Claude and got: When text content gets scraped from the web, and used for ever-increasing training data to improve. Copyright laws get broken, content gets addressively scraped, and even though you might have deleted your original work, it might must show up because it got c…

That’s the correct text of the article, as far as I can tell. Though not the entirety of it. The author goes on to say that ChatGPT wasn’t able to parse out the underlying text.

Part of the reason it might be useful is not because “no AI can ever read it” (because I’m sure a pentesting-focused Claude Code could get past almost any similar obfuscation), but rather that the completely automated and dumb scrapers stealing your content for the training of the AI models can’t read it. For many systems, that’s more than enough.

That said, I recently completely tore apart my website and rebuilt it from the ground up because I wasn’t happy with how inaccessible it was. For many like me, sacrificing accessibility is not just a bad look, but plainly unacceptable.

Re: Sacrificing accessibility for not getting web scraped

#8
post #3

Congratulations, I guess? I can't read your content. But ... The machines can't either, so ... great job! Although... Hmm! I just pasted it into Claude and got: When text content gets scraped from the web, and used for ever-increasing training data to improve. Copyright laws get broken, content gets addressively scraped, and even though you might have deleted your original work, it might must show up because it got c…

This is fairly highly accurate (from a skim read, close to but not quite 100%). The article describes fooling ChatGPT with a caeser cipher, but not a full test of the obfuscation in-practice.

Re: Sacrificing accessibility for not getting web scraped

#9
post #5

AFAIK at least the comet browser uses OCR, so I worry that the "OCR not feasible" argument is sadly wrong.

The comet browser is different from scraping, though, no? Not that I’d ever use this, but the goal doesn’t seem to be “no AI can ever touch this” but rather “large scale training-data scrapers find useless garbage.”

Re: Sacrificing accessibility for not getting web scraped

#10
post #7
post #3

Congratulations, I guess? I can't read your content. But ... The machines can't either, so ... great job! Although... Hmm! I just pasted it into Claude and got: When text content gets scraped from the web, and used for ever-increasing training data to improve. Copyright laws get broken, content gets addressively scraped, and even though you might have deleted your original work, it might must show up because it got c…

That’s the correct text of the article, as far as I can tell. Though not the entirety of it. The author goes on to say that ChatGPT wasn’t able to parse out the underlying text. Part of the reason it might be useful is not because “no AI can ever read it” (because I’m sure a pentesting-focused Claude Code could get past almost any similar obfuscation), but rather that the completely automated and dumb scrapers steali…

I didn't use Claude Code. I just pasted it directly into the web interface and said "I can't read this, can you help?" and then I excerpted the result so you sighted folks didn't have to reread, you could just verify the content matched.

So basically this person has put up a big "fuck you" sign to people like me... while at the same time not protecting their content from actual AI (if this technique actually caught on it is trivial to reverse it in your data ingestion pipeline)

Post reply on HN