• survirtual@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Only kind of true.

    If they did implement all those measures, all you do is launch a puppet browser rendered off screen and scrape the content you want. This could work for any site and it is impossible for anyone to detect.

    For ads, as a nuclear option, you can detect when they occur and black the stream out.

    I would personally do this if left with no other option.

    • cley_faye@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Cue detection of “realistic” human activity on the UI and preventing streaming if the server determine this activity does not match a human enough pattern.

      I’m exaggerating on that one, but… that’s not even that implausible these days.

      My point was, dancing this dance with “big website”, whoever it is, will always be an endless uphill battle.

      • survirtual@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        12 hours ago

        They can’t do that because of accessibility reasons. If they did that, a disabled person has grounds to sue them for proper aria hints & controls.

        It doesn’t matter what kind of content it is, either. It must be made accessible.

        • cley_faye@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Uh. I don’t know how it is on the other side of the ocean, but around here, it’s a nice goal, but there’s much more care going into making messes than implementing accessible websites. Even official government services sometimes just barely slaps an “accessibility conformity: partial/none” and keep going on.

          I’m not sure having an accessible web is enough to overcome the thirst for ad money and control.