News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Congrats! Web scraping is legal! (US precedent) by Wowfunhappy on Wednesday January 29, 2020 @09:33AM (#22180874)
I want web scraping to be legal—but, is it really contradictory to say "I want this data to be accessible to real humans only"?

Any person can post on Hacker News. However, if someone made a bot to post to Hacker News, I think most of us would be pretty upset.

Re:Congrats! Web scraping is legal! (US precedent) by Dayshine on Wednesday January 29, 2020 @11:16AM (#22182144)
What you might mean is:

- I want my data to be publicly available

- I don't want my data to be processed/distributed/sold without my permission

E.g. individual use is fine, profit making is not.

Which is my expectation with LinkedIn. I want people to see my profile, I don't want them to sell it as marketing leads!

Re:Congrats! Web scraping is legal! (US precedent) by mic47 on Wednesday January 29, 2020 @01:14PM (#22183879)
Agree with this, and I would also add this - I want to be in control of my data and change the setting. - I want to be able to delete my data.

If scraping on linked-in is banned (and linked-in is enforcing it), then I do have have control of my data, since I can change the setting, and it will no longer be public (It's not perfect, since some might already scraped it, but the extend would be much smaller). Also, if I decide to delete my data, linked can do that for data it control, but not for scraped data.

Re:Congrats! Web scraping is legal! (US precedent) by stubish on Wednesday January 29, 2020 @10:07AM (#22181284)
Scraping information is not the same as posting. There are a number of bots that scrape Hacker News and people here generally consider them pretty cool.
Re:Congrats! Web scraping is legal! (US precedent) by nathanlied on Wednesday January 29, 2020 @09:45AM (#22181004)
Isn't that a different paradigm, though? A posting bot set loose on a forum/platform will (normally) visibly degrade service in a much more visible and impactful way than a scraping bot. And in either case, writing (and running!) a bot that posts on HN is not illegal behaviour in itself.
Re:Congrats! Web scraping is legal! (US precedent) by danShumway on Wednesday January 29, 2020 @09:45AM (#22181016)
I dunno.

I'm on Hackernews to see interesting articles and read interesting conversation. If a bot can post interesting articles and make interesting conversation, I'm not sure I care that it's a bot. And if a human can't do those things, I'm not sure I care whether or not they're 'real'.

https://xkcd.com/810/

That focus on "we don't care if you self-promote, we don't care why you're here, we just want you to be a good citizen" is part of why I like HN.

It's not completely black and white, but in general I believe that users online have the Right to Delegate[0]. That right should only be legally taken away if there's a really, unbelievably compelling social justification for doing so. I am pretty skeptical that banning web scraping has that kind of justification.

[0]: https://anewdigitalmanifesto.com/#right-to-delegate

Re:Congrats! Web scraping is legal! (US precedent) by alaaf on Wednesday January 29, 2020 @09:35AM (#22180897)
Isn’t this different from read access? Apart from server resources, downloading content doesn’t effect a web site as much as posting on it.
Re:Congrats! Web scraping is legal! (US precedent) by TheCoelacanth on Wednesday January 29, 2020 @11:42AM (#22182547)
I don't really care if the comments are from bots, per se. I care if they are quality comments or not. Whether or not the comments are from bots is just a proxy for whether or not they are actually good.
Re:Congrats! Web scraping is legal! (US precedent) by manaskarekar on Wednesday January 29, 2020 @09:46AM (#22181033)
Makes me wonder, how many users on HN are actually very convincing bots?
Re:Congrats! Web scraping is legal! (US precedent) by Nasrudith on Wednesday January 29, 2020 @11:35AM (#22182413)
Humans cannot directly access websites - a machine is always involved. I know perfectly well what you mean but the distinction on a deeper level is fundamentally imaginary.

The best is some sort of heuristic like captchas and even they can be outsourced so that the human doing them isn't actually viewing the content.

The thing about a bot which bothers people is the behavior anyway. A bottish acting human would get people just as upset.