@madsenandersc@social.vivaldi.net
Post #1916987
2026-04-25 20:00 UTC
@benjaoming
I don't follow the reasoning behind your example here?
If the field in the ActivityPub protocol cannot be enforced (like the entry in robots.txt), why bother then? It will just be like the "Do not track"-field in your browser settings that will give those that don't know any better a false sense of security. Or do I misunderstand your example?
I still firmly believe that this problem can only be solved reliably at the application level, not the protocol.
Replies (1)
-
@benjaoming@social.data.coop 2026-04-25 20:13
@madsenandersc I think there's a genuine chance to tell when a post shows up in an LLM model and it had a field that said "don't train LLMs with this post". The rest of the enforcement work is about figuring out if the scraper could have seen that field and chose to ignore it. Even if posts can be exposed through applications that filter out the field, it could be possible to prove that an LLM (or ad profiling) has been using data from the source, hence had access to the field.