Insults %>% Select() %>% filter() %>% nerd()

Now I assume fixing the bug was not in line with their business model

The future if text documents were Json:

City_pic.png.xml

A word document is xml

Same

Also exposed our perception capabilities by distribution of imagery in it’s native resolution.

For everyone with a peloton, you can flash the bike with an aftermarket software.

People who can afford 3000$ tickets can afford to take a day off to vote.

And businesses

You don’t get the context of this joke

We hooked up chatgpt to do code reviews so this is no longer a problem. The Children yearn for the stack

Security is an art… the art of not giving a fuck about your data

-Op, probably

One of us!

If you cat a log, what would tail report?

The original post in this chain talked about ethics, I was continuing that conversation.

In terms of free use, I feel the collection/aggregation of the data is a work in itself. You are taking a greater portion than the author specified you can take. Courts have ruled this does not constitute free use when people used yahoo’s market data. How is it any different now when people are using orders of magnitudes more data.

Because there is a standard way for people to make their consent known. Just because you ignore someone withholding you consent doesn’t mean you are free morally.

That would probably be more expensive than just paying companies. But it is morally different because a human did visit their website so their good will was not violated as they expressed this consent when they published the website.

Yes I agree your use style could be immoral based on the agreement your transaction specifies. But if you’ve agreed your payment is to access their material then you have consent.

You asked if it’s moral, this is irrelevant

That’s exactly what robot.txt is… they spell out that they don’t want you to access this site with an automated system.