When you "break" the anti-AI software I have on my website that does not illustrate that the software doesn't work well enough: It shows that you are someone who explicitly circumvents people's stated values, preferences and borders.
-
@tante out of curiosity, what notable examples of this are there (aside from the thing when a bluesky user submitted an llm-generated patch to open-slopware)
@hexaheximal @davidgerard just linked a tool some Kernel dev generated to beat "Anubis", which is one of those kinds of tools
-
When you "break" the anti-AI software I have on my website that does not illustrate that the software doesn't work well enough: It shows that you are someone who explicitly circumvents people's stated values, preferences and borders. You are an abuser.
It's a test about how you treat other people, whether you respect their dignity. And you failed.
@tante Techbros all have a problem with consent.
-
@tante Techbros all have a problem with consent.
so potus
-
@hexaheximal @davidgerard just linked a tool some Kernel dev generated to beat "Anubis", which is one of those kinds of tools
@tante @hexaheximal @davidgerard
what? how is anubis beatable? dont they have to use at least a headless browser? so it is heavy for scrapers because of the challenge?
-
@tante @hexaheximal @davidgerard
what? how is anubis beatable? dont they have to use at least a headless browser? so it is heavy for scrapers because of the challenge?
@utf_7 @tante @davidgerard from a technical perspective, it is actually trivially easy to defeat anubis. it works by calculating a hash proof-of-work, which a standalone program can do too. and, of course, once the challenge is completed it stores a challenge proof as a cookie. the result is an anti-bot system that is really just a javascript checker with fancy marketing
-
@utf_7 @tante @davidgerard from a technical perspective, it is actually trivially easy to defeat anubis. it works by calculating a hash proof-of-work, which a standalone program can do too. and, of course, once the challenge is completed it stores a challenge proof as a cookie. the result is an anti-bot system that is really just a javascript checker with fancy marketing
@hexaheximal @tante @davidgerard
uff, hard to beat that shit then. besides invisible links that scrapers may follow, i dont think recaptcha is ai proof
-
@crankylinuxuser @TripTilt @tante "My computer. My user agent. My rules on my side. If you don't want to share, then by all means, sudo systemctl disable nginx && sudo systemctl stop nginx."
They did. It is named Anubis and you're really making their point. If someone puts a lock some something and says don't touch, you can't tell them, "Well if you don't want people to touch it, then don't put it outside!"
Your computer yes, but interacting with THEIR computer. And they don't consent.
When the data hits my machine/network, I'll do with it as I choose.
I have tools to bypass Anubis as well. Again, even Anubis considers even a secured Firefox 'abusive'. So does cloudflare and google. Turns out to not be considered abusive, you have to be willing to get abused. Imagine that.
And what more of an abuser is there when that entity demands their software or configuration on YOUR MACHINE. That's hella abusive. And par for the course for scum like DRM peddlers, and evidently Anubis users.
-
@hexaheximal @tante @davidgerard
uff, hard to beat that shit then. besides invisible links that scrapers may follow, i dont think recaptcha is ai proof
@utf_7 @hexaheximal @tante yeah, it "beats" something that anubis doesn't claim to do. it's a bad post.
-
@utf_7 @hexaheximal @tante yeah, it "beats" something that anubis doesn't claim to do. it's a bad post.
@davidgerard @utf_7 @tante while anubis does block (most) scrapers, that's really only because at least most of them don't implement javascript at all, let alone the required features to run the proof-of-work code.
iirc also some scrapers have been modified to now bypass the proof-of-work challenge page by just computing the proof-of-work itself
-
of course you are right, how see it, blocking agents and the like is like the bouncer on a website that does not want you to enter or see something, while blocking ads is avoiding not a bouncer but the loud clowns making people interested in the circus and leading them in through the shop and thus showing them something they didn't want to see
Tante has already made a distinction between companies and individuals. I'm OK with that.
But I, an individual, use multiple user agents for my personal reasons. My tools do scrape/save. BTW thats legal. And my tools display and scrape both, to lessen server impact. (Hister).
All this is ranting is about AI and LLMs. And Its all just a loud proclamation that they are "Right". (Insert old man yelling at cloud meme)
-
When you "break" the anti-AI software I have on my website that does not illustrate that the software doesn't work well enough: It shows that you are someone who explicitly circumvents people's stated values, preferences and borders. You are an abuser.
It's a test about how you treat other people, whether you respect their dignity. And you failed.
@tante Is your "anti-AI software" some half-asssed coinminer? Because if so you are an abuser and should think carefully before throwing stones.
-
When the data hits my machine/network, I'll do with it as I choose.
I have tools to bypass Anubis as well. Again, even Anubis considers even a secured Firefox 'abusive'. So does cloudflare and google. Turns out to not be considered abusive, you have to be willing to get abused. Imagine that.
And what more of an abuser is there when that entity demands their software or configuration on YOUR MACHINE. That's hella abusive. And par for the course for scum like DRM peddlers, and evidently Anubis users.
@crankylinuxuser @trashpanda @TripTilt @tante Pretty much this. Part of being in society is accepting that there are boundaries to personal preferences and interacting with other people is accepting that something one considers to be in their personal bubble can be something that others feel is in their personal bubble and there is inevitably going to be disagreement about where those are.
-
@davidgerard @utf_7 @tante while anubis does block (most) scrapers, that's really only because at least most of them don't implement javascript at all, let alone the required features to run the proof-of-work code.
iirc also some scrapers have been modified to now bypass the proof-of-work challenge page by just computing the proof-of-work itself
@hexaheximal @utf_7 @tante anubis slows a flood of scrapers, not 100% of individual AI bozos.
-
When the data hits my machine/network, I'll do with it as I choose.
I have tools to bypass Anubis as well. Again, even Anubis considers even a secured Firefox 'abusive'. So does cloudflare and google. Turns out to not be considered abusive, you have to be willing to get abused. Imagine that.
And what more of an abuser is there when that entity demands their software or configuration on YOUR MACHINE. That's hella abusive. And par for the course for scum like DRM peddlers, and evidently Anubis users.
@crankylinuxuser @trashpanda @TripTilt @tante As soon as a see an "enable javascript and disable any ad blocker" popup, I close the tab, every time.
-
@hexaheximal @tante @davidgerard
uff, hard to beat that shit then. besides invisible links that scrapers may follow, i dont think recaptcha is ai proof
@utf_7 @hexaheximal @tante @davidgerard Recaptcha automatically blocks all of us human users who block Google for privacy reasons.
Now they want access to web cams that many desktops and laptops don't even HAVE or in the case of laptops are often broken on Linux. The privacy implications of that are staggering.
I simply treat sites that hide behind Recaptcha as having been taken down
-
When you "break" the anti-AI software I have on my website that does not illustrate that the software doesn't work well enough: It shows that you are someone who explicitly circumvents people's stated values, preferences and borders. You are an abuser.
It's a test about how you treat other people, whether you respect their dignity. And you failed.
@tante I wonder if that is even legal in Germany… They are circumventing a protection mechanism!
-
@crankylinuxuser @trashpanda @TripTilt @tante Pretty much this. Part of being in society is accepting that there are boundaries to personal preferences and interacting with other people is accepting that something one considers to be in their personal bubble can be something that others feel is in their personal bubble and there is inevitably going to be disagreement about where those are.
@Newhereish @trashpanda @TripTilt @tante
I'm a system engineer. I run online services as well, professionally, and personally.
I know what abuse is. Hack attempts (get /../../../../ etc). DoS. DDoS. There's a few others, but the commonality is that they attempt to exhaust a limited resource to prevent me from the thing.
Running a custom user agent and ingesting into a search engine/cache not is NOT ABUSIVE.
Just because I did something you didn't like, does not make it abusive. Hell, I've fought with idiots who disabled right-click menus on websites. Like no, you sent my agent the data. I have it already.
But again, this is just more #LLM hatred #propaganda . There's more and more of us who run local-everything. And yes, local search/cache agents, with local LLMs and more.
And yea, the LLM companies are terrible. I don't use'em. I don't have to.
-
When you "break" the anti-AI software I have on my website that does not illustrate that the software doesn't work well enough: It shows that you are someone who explicitly circumvents people's stated values, preferences and borders. You are an abuser.
It's a test about how you treat other people, whether you respect their dignity. And you failed.
@tante It's disappointing to see a number of people take the "it's on the web, therefore it's fair game" position
Literal hobbyless, tragedy of the commons behavior.
-
When you "break" the anti-AI software I have on my website that does not illustrate that the software doesn't work well enough: It shows that you are someone who explicitly circumvents people's stated values, preferences and borders. You are an abuser.
It's a test about how you treat other people, whether you respect their dignity. And you failed.
@tante Ultimately, this is why I opted for a different stance. Instead of trying to block anything, every page has license text that explicitly states that use with AI software implies they agree the my commercial license for my content, which is $30 million USD. Yes, I'm willing to cash-out. (It's a dual-license, which is normal enough.)
By feeding my content to AI software, they both agree that the pricing is fair and that they're willing to pay.
You have to click a link to hide the license as in a JavaScript-capable browser and you don't see the real text until you do. In a text-mode browser or without Javascript it simply always shows. It prints on every page, but in small print.
It's what the software industry calls a "shrinkwrap license" so it isn't anything particularly new or strange. They read the license and click a button to acknowledge they agree with the license. If they don't agree with the license, they don't click the link and go somewhere else. (It doesn't use cookies or server-side anything.)
-
When you "break" the anti-AI software I have on my website that does not illustrate that the software doesn't work well enough: It shows that you are someone who explicitly circumvents people's stated values, preferences and borders. You are an abuser.
It's a test about how you treat other people, whether you respect their dignity. And you failed.
@tante
In the end most pages will probably have to go the troy hunt way and have people pay at least a symbolic dollar for an account and track abuse based on that...
