Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 o…
But it's "made with ♥" (the footer says so). (He's broken mainstream browsers, too - ctrl+f doesn't work in the page.) GPT 5.2 extracted the correct text, but it definitely struggled - 3m36s, and it had to write a script to do it, and it messed up some of the formatting. It actually found this thread, but rejected that as a solution in the CoT: "The search result gives a decoded excerpt, which seems correct, but I’d…
Re: Sacrificing accessibility for not getting web scraped
#41This is the point I was making downthread: no scraper will use 3m36s of frontier LLM time to get <100 KB of data. This is why his method would technically achieve what he asked for. Someone alluded to this further down the thread, but I wonder if one-to-one letter substitution specifically would still expose some extractable information to the LLM, even without decoding.