• YTG123
    link
    fedilink
    English
    721 year ago

    We need laws mandating respect of robots.txt. This is what happens when you don’t codify stuff

    • Echo Dot
      link
      fedilink
      English
      371 year ago

      It’s a bad solution to a problem anyway. If we are going to legally mandate a solution I want to take the opportunity to come up with an actually better fix than the hacky solution that is robots.txt

    • @patatahooligan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      241 year ago

      AI companies will probably get a free pass to ignore robots.txt even if it were enforced by law. That’s what they’re trying to do with copyright and it looks likely that they’ll get away with it.

    • @AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      121 year ago

      Turning that into a law is ridiculous - you really can’t consider that more than advisory unless you enforce it with technical means. For example, maybe put it behind a login or captcha if you want only humans to see it

      • Kairos
        link
        fedilink
        English
        91 year ago

        Are you aware of what “unlisted” means?

        • @AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          3
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Yes, and there’s also no law against calling an unlisted phone number

          Also we already had this battle with robots.txt. In the beginning, search engines wouldn’t honor it either because they wanted the competitive advantage of more info, and websites trusted it too much and tried to wall off too much info that way.

          There were complaints, bad pr, lawsuits, call for a law

          It’s no longer the Wild West:

          • search engines are mature and generally honor robots.txt
          • websites use rate limiting to conserve resources and user logins to fence off data there’s a reason to fence off
          • truce: neither side is as greedy
          • there is no such law nor is that reasonable
          • Kairos
            link
            fedilink
            English
            31 year ago

            There’s also no law against visiting an unlisted webpage? What?

    • @wabafee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I hope not, laws tend to get outdated real fast. Who knows robots.txt might not even be used in the future and it just there adding space because of law reasons.

      • jackeryjoo
        link
        fedilink
        English
        121 year ago

        You can describe the law in a similar way to a specification, and you can make it as broad as needed. Something like the file name shouldn’t ever come up as an issue.

        • @GhostMatter@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          21 year ago

          The law can be broad with allowances to define specifics by decree, executive order or the equivalent.

      • kingthrillgore
        link
        fedilink
        English
        41 year ago

        robots.txt has been an unofficial standard for 30 years and its augmented with sitemap.xml to help index uncrawlable pages, and Schema.org to expose contents for Semantic Web. I’m not stating it shouldn’t not be a law, but to suggest changing norms as a reason is a pretty weak counterargument, man.

      • Echo Dot
        link
        fedilink
        English
        31 year ago

        We don’t need new laws we just need enforcement of existing laws. It is already illegal to copy copyrighted content, it’s just that the AI companies do it anyway and no one does anything about it.

        Enforcing respect for robots.txt doesn’t matter because the AI companies are already breaking the law.