4 ms·

Can any brave soul wade through the LLM prose to provide a human-readable summary?

by Retr0id 1mo ago

405error 1mo ago
I cannot verify whether it is technically correct, but it's about how to defeat Tiktok's bot filters to scrape it.
arcfour 1mo ago
Man, I could use $699. If this gets even a single sale, then maybe I need to try having less decency... (I guess that is sort of a roundabout summary...)
- echoangle 1mo ago
  Would you say that this is immoral? Since it’s data that’s public anyways, I don’t see why putting it in a table and selling it is a bad thing.
  - arcfour 1mo ago
    No, I don't care at all, but I recognize that my morals might be lower than others here. To me it's just public data...whatever. My criticism was basically - this is trying to sell an AI slop project for $699 a pop - I could get this out of a few Claude Code sessions if I had the storage and network bandwidth to run such a scraper. The value proposition is questionable when the writing shows that the entire project was AI generated, and clearly Claude understands the way the TikTok Android app internal API works quite well...
    - arvid-lind 1mo ago
      The AI giants got where they are by pushing similar limits and setting aside moral (and legal) issues to be settled later in court, so the idea seems to fit the general zeitgeist we're living in. Not really criticism, just an observation.
  - breezybottom 1mo ago
    What is "public" data? It admits to violating the ToS.
    - arcfour 1mo ago
      Something posted with the understanding that it could potentially be viewed by anyone on the Internet with minimal/no restriction. ToS are just what you follow if you don't want to get banned off of the site. If you don't care about that, then you can go hog wild, though you're being a bit of a jerk/not playing nice obviously.
      - breezybottom 1mo ago
        Any company could potentially be hacked, so by that standard all data is public. And no, the ToS is legally binding on the company as well.
        arcfour 1mo ago
        That's a blatant strawman - that's not a reasonable position at all. A reasonable person does not expect their private medical records to be accessible to you or me just because they are stored in an EHR system. They might be surprised that you or I looked at their TikTok video when we aren't the intended audience, but they still posted it publicly, with the understanding that it would be made freely available to others.
        breezybottom 1mo ago
        It's definitely not a strawman. Perhaps you meant that it's a false equivalency, but I don't think that's true either. With how common data hacks are, why wouldn't a reasonable person expect their medical records to leak? I received at least two such breach notices just last year.
        arcfour 1mo ago
        Obviously I meant that any data a person expects to be public, like a public post on a social media site... I was not referring to data exposed in data breaches, which is a different subject entirely... If that was not obvious to you then I apologize; though it really should have been, since you are encouraged to interact with others in good faith on HN. And if you expect your medical records to be public...then what is the point of this discussion?
  - kenniskrag 1mo ago
    Because a lot of things is public online and can't be copied and sold e.g. due to copyright, patents and trademark. Also if you access a website you are bound to a ToS contract and this is a breach of that contract.
    - echoangle 1mo ago
      Breaching a contract isn’t a crime though, it’s a civil matter.
      - AlecSchueler 1mo ago
        You asked if it was immoral, not if it was a crime.
      - deleted 1mo ago
        [deleted]
simonw 1mo ago
"I uploaded 4.5 billion of those videos to Hugging Face" = I scraped the metadata (title, view count, etc) for 4.5 billion TikTok videos using the same API as their Android app. I posted the data to HF as Parquet. The video content itself is not included. I'll sell you my Go scraping code.

Can any brave soul wade through the LLM prose to provide a human-readable summary?

by Retr0id 1mo ago

Can any brave soul wade through the LLM prose to provide a human-readable summary?

405error 1mo ago

I cannot verify whether it is technically correct, but it's about how to defeat Tiktok's bot filters to scrape it.

arcfour 1mo ago

Man, I could use $699. If this gets even a single sale, then maybe I need to try having less decency... (I guess that is sort of a roundabout summary...)

echoangle 1mo ago
Would you say that this is immoral? Since it’s data that’s public anyways, I don’t see why putting it in a table and selling it is a bad thing.
- arcfour 1mo ago
  No, I don't care at all, but I recognize that my morals might be lower than others here. To me it's just public data...whatever. My criticism was basically - this is trying to sell an AI slop project for $699 a pop - I could get this out of a few Claude Code sessions if I had the storage and network bandwidth to run such a scraper. The value proposition is questionable when the writing shows that the entire project was AI generated, and clearly Claude understands the way the TikTok Android app internal API works quite well...
  - arvid-lind 1mo ago
    The AI giants got where they are by pushing similar limits and setting aside moral (and legal) issues to be settled later in court, so the idea seems to fit the general zeitgeist we're living in. Not really criticism, just an observation.
- breezybottom 1mo ago
  What is "public" data? It admits to violating the ToS.
  - arcfour 1mo ago
    Something posted with the understanding that it could potentially be viewed by anyone on the Internet with minimal/no restriction. ToS are just what you follow if you don't want to get banned off of the site. If you don't care about that, then you can go hog wild, though you're being a bit of a jerk/not playing nice obviously.
    - breezybottom 1mo ago
      Any company could potentially be hacked, so by that standard all data is public. And no, the ToS is legally binding on the company as well.
      - arcfour 1mo ago
        That's a blatant strawman - that's not a reasonable position at all. A reasonable person does not expect their private medical records to be accessible to you or me just because they are stored in an EHR system. They might be surprised that you or I looked at their TikTok video when we aren't the intended audience, but they still posted it publicly, with the understanding that it would be made freely available to others.
        breezybottom 1mo ago
        It's definitely not a strawman. Perhaps you meant that it's a false equivalency, but I don't think that's true either. With how common data hacks are, why wouldn't a reasonable person expect their medical records to leak? I received at least two such breach notices just last year.
        arcfour 1mo ago
        Obviously I meant that any data a person expects to be public, like a public post on a social media site... I was not referring to data exposed in data breaches, which is a different subject entirely... If that was not obvious to you then I apologize; though it really should have been, since you are encouraged to interact with others in good faith on HN. And if you expect your medical records to be public...then what is the point of this discussion?
- kenniskrag 1mo ago
  Because a lot of things is public online and can't be copied and sold e.g. due to copyright, patents and trademark. Also if you access a website you are bound to a ToS contract and this is a breach of that contract.
  - echoangle 1mo ago
    Breaching a contract isn’t a crime though, it’s a civil matter.
    - AlecSchueler 1mo ago
      You asked if it was immoral, not if it was a crime.
    - deleted 1mo ago
      [deleted]

simonw 1mo ago

"I uploaded 4.5 billion of those videos to Hugging Face" = I scraped the metadata (title, view count, etc) for 4.5 billion TikTok videos using the same API as their Android app. I posted the data to HF as Parquet. The video content itself is not included. I'll sell you my Go scraping code.