3 ms·
It isn't neat as long as it doesn't work with all modern web browsers (even with fingerprinting protection) and doesn't have a fallback for older browsers. WWW
by niutech 2y ago
It isn't neat as long as it doesn't work with all modern web browsers (even with fingerprinting protection) and doesn't have a fallback for older browsers. WWW should be universally accessible and progressively enhanced, starting with plain HTML.
- afavour 2y agoIt isn’t a serious proposal. It’s a creative hack that no one, author included is suggesting should be used in production.
- kjhcvkek77 2y agoThis philosophy hands your content on a silver platter to ai companies, so they can rake in money while giving nothing back to the author.
- latexr 2y agoI don’t support LLM companies stealing content and profiting from it without contributing back. But if you’re going to fight that by making things more difficult for humans, especially those with accessibility needs, then what even is the point of publishing anything?
- account42 2y agoWrapping the website in javascript also won't stop ML crawlers as they probably all already use headless chromium to deal with the modern web.
- kjhcvkek77 2y agoThere's a saying, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. An author might reasonably prefer 90% of people visit his site to 100% of people consuming the content indirectly.
- latexr 2y agoI don’t think those numbers are even close to realistic. It’s absurd to think that having an accessible website will make everyone consume it via LLM, or that having an inaccessible website (which, by the way, will only stave off scraping temporarily) will make most people visit it. We can’t have a productive conversation by making up numbers.