Anonymous user
Talk:Yahoo! search interface: Difference between revisions
→TOS violation
Line 26:
: I've done a little bit of experiments; using directly a wget will result in a 403 http answer. Changing the user-agent (even a void string, or a non existing like MikeyMouse/1.0!) worked... '''But'''... I've read Yahoo! TOS, and tried wget on Yahoo!, and it works even without changing User-Agent. So, maybe, this same task can be changed in order to use Yahoo! instead? (Anyone with a better english could check the TOS, if it really does not disallow what Google disallows) --[[User:ShinTakezou|ShinTakezou]] 21:50, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
::I would think that most search providers would not like programmatic searches as it is so easily abused. What would we loose by just dropping this task? Against what could be lost if we include it? --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 22:29, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
::: I've not read the task specs (just the title). If the task was interesting, we loose an interesting task; if it was not, ... But if the task's creator would like to keep the idea, then s/he could take a look at Yahoo. Of course, even though Yahoo's TOS allows for automated use of their ''service'', this does not mean we (or anybody else) can flood it with search requests! And what world would it be if I take a perfectly legal and TOS-compliant code from RC, then ''abuse it'' and for this reason RC has trouble?! (I am thinking about the TOS of Yahoo... it seems to me an automated script using Yahoo search engine wouldn't violate their TOS, so that they have no reason to consider RC responsible of any ''abuse'' of the code... if it is possible such a relationship between an ''abuser'' and the source for the code which made the abuse possible, sites like [http://www.w3.org/Library/ this] or [http://pavuk.sourceforge.net/ this] shouldn't be indexed at all!) --[[User:ShinTakezou|ShinTakezou]] 00:10, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
| |||