Skip to main content
Meta Stack Exchange

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

34
  • 214
    TOTALLY not related to the data dump kill project, right? Commented Sep 19, 2024 at 18:15
  • 212
    So we're just giving up on that whole day dream of building a library of knowledge for the public good, are we? If the only way someone can find what they need in your repository of knowledge is to pay for the tool to search it, it's not for the public good; it's for profit. It wouldn't be so bad, except you're basically paywalling content that was donated to you because we were under the impression that we were doing something to advance knowledge for everyone, not just the people who could pay. Commented Sep 19, 2024 at 19:55
  • 6
    Would it be possible to do this in a way that doesn't affect the entire network but excludes things like review queues, the Staging Ground, user pages (maybe tag pages as well) etc and other things commonly accessed by userscripts but not from unwanted means? If you just want to protect posts from unwanted GenAI training, why not just rate-limit public posts for automated traffic and maybe question lists if necessary? Commented Sep 19, 2024 at 19:59
  • 9
    @dan1st Part of the goal of compiling a list of key curator utilities is to assess the correct approach to minimizing disruption. Allowing access to certain parts of the site is an option for mitigating the impact. For example, an exemption for Chat / Bonfire was not part of the first-draft plan (a long time ago), but after a deeper review of community tools, it became clear that categorically exempting Chat was the most expedient way to avoid community disruption. Put another way, I'm reiterating what's in the post: please, list your tools, and we'll evaluate what we can do. Commented Sep 19, 2024 at 20:42
  • 7
    @Sonic We are using NOARCHIVE, not NOCACHE. Commented Sep 19, 2024 at 21:43
  • 25
    @Slate Perfect, thanks! Since the discontinuation of Google cache, Bing cache is now the largest provider of cached search results on the Web, so it'd be really bad to lose that. Glad to confirm it's not going away. Commented Sep 19, 2024 at 21:48
  • 92
    "except indexing by known and recognized search engines" - which are those? Commented Sep 19, 2024 at 22:47
  • 11
    @HannahVernon - I'm sure thats what it is too, but there would be a big difference between "we're trying to stop bing chat because we've seen undeniable evidence that se content has been used nefariously to do xyz" vs "GeminiAI are going to stop paying us if we're giving away our milk for free". It definitely is clear which one of these it is more likely to be though Commented Sep 20, 2024 at 8:15
  • 32
    @Sayse it is CLEARLY "how can we gate keep access to a Creative Common freely reproducible resource". Just look back at the last months..the dump mess and so on. Personally I find it quite insulting that we are feed these corporate lies filled post, like we were so stupid to not see the real intent behind these moves. Commented Sep 20, 2024 at 8:31
  • 86
    So this post says what SE is doing, but what I can't figure out is why this is being done. What problem are you solving? Are there too many search engines that overload your servers? Or are you very upset by language models learning on the Q&A content? Or what? Commented Sep 20, 2024 at 9:38
  • 53
    robots.txt only keeps honest people out Commented Sep 20, 2024 at 18:44
  • 55
    What is the purpose of this change? What kind of abuse was occurring that this is trying to prevent? This just seems to be a completely arbitrary unnecessary change to me, maybe I am missing something. Commented Sep 21, 2024 at 15:49
  • 28
    Just curious -- exactly which authorization do I need to access CC BY-SA content? In bulk, if I desire? By script, if I choose? I know that you are desperately seeking to protect what you consider your intellectual property -- but it isn't, is it? The aggregation may be more than its parts, but it's still CC BY-SA, isn't it? Commented Sep 22, 2024 at 8:12
  • 15
    "Let's be a bit more realistic in our criticism here." SE is simply putting their own profit way in front of the mission of building a knowledge library free for everyone and do not deserve another bit of content unless they start providing data dumps without limitations again. This would be my realistic criticism here, but who knows, maybe it's also too strong. Commented Sep 30, 2024 at 21:04
  • 23
    @CPlus Exactly. They call it "community data protection", but what they really mean is "profit protection". Microsoft didn't pay (or not enough), so they're blocking Microsoft. See stackoverflow.blog/2024/09/30/ongoing-community-data-protection Of course, they're hiding their true motives behind the usual "community" and "socially responsible" jargon, but given the context, it becomes clear enough. Commented Oct 2, 2024 at 10:53