I see zero public evidence that they've filed any lawsuits against the members of AOM in any jurisdiction. I'm sure there's been a lot of threatening letters sent...

We need a more efficient way to eliminate bullshit patents or bullshit patent infringement claims than "violate them then spend millions on lawyers to fight them in court".

> If AV2 was vibe coded, there would be no case.

…for copyright. Not for anything else. Patents would still apply.

I don't know this stuff super well but I imagine it's not necessarily about the lawyers being right or wrong so much as what they can convince people of. The ideal scenario for the patent troll is they can intimidate you into licensing with them. Another good outcome for them (though more costly) is they can convince some non-expert in court. In either case the big players behind the codec can defend themselves but a small one just picking it up downstream as OSS can't.

Of course, static websites is the best solution to that problem.

Our documentation and a main website are not fronted by this protection, so they're still accessible for the scrapers.

You cant really cache the dynamic content produced by the forges like Gitlab and, say, web forums like phpbb. So it means every request gets through the slow path. Media/JS is of course cached on the edge, so it's not an issue.

Even when the amount of AI requests isnt that high - generally it's in hundreds per second tops for our services combined - that's still a load that causes issues for legitimate users/developers. We've seen it grow from somewhat reasonable to pretty much being 99% of responses we serve.

Can it be solved by throwing more hardware at the problem? Sure. But it's not sustainable, and the reasonable approach in our case is to filter off the parasitic traffic.

They are a scourge, they never rate-limit themselves, there are a hundred of them, and a significant number don’t respect robots.txt. Many of them also end up our meta:no-index,no-follow search pages leading to cost overruns on our Algolia usage. We spend way too much time adjusting WAF and other bot-controls than we should have.

I think there's a few things at play here

- AI scrapers will pull a bunch of docs from many sites in parallel (so instead of a human request where someone picks a single Google result, it hits a bunch of sites)

- AI will crawl the site looking for the correct answer which may hit a handful of pages

- AI sends requests in quick succession (big bursts instead of small trickle over longer time)

- Personal assistants may crawl the site repeatedly scraping everything (we saw a fair bit of this at work, they announced themselves with user agents)

- At work (b2b SaaS webapp) we also found that the personal assistant variety tended to hammer really computationally expensive data export and reporting endpoints generally without filters. While our app technically supported it, it was very inorganic traffic

That said, I don't think the solution is blanket blocks. Really it's exposing sites are poorly optimized for emerging technology.

I'm sure there are many solutions for many problems, but expecting a small Foss development team to know or implement them all is rather unreasonable.

I think the world gains more if the VLAN team focuses on their amazing, free contribution to the world, than if they spend the same time trying to figure out how to save you two clicks.

We all hate that this is happening, but you don't need to attack everyone that is unfortunately caught up in it.

> I highly doubt there is no other technically feasible option to block the AI bots.

If you have discovered such an option, you could get very wealthy: minimizing friction for humans in e-commerce is valuable. If you're a drive-by critic not vested in the project, then yours is an instance of talk being cheap.

I'm all ears on how we can fix it otherwise.

Keep in mind that those kinds of services: - should not be MITMed by CDNs - are generally ran by volunteers with zero budget, money and time-wise

wat. The protections in place that the OP is talking about are almost entirely due to (not government and company) bad actors.

The commons in question is the internet itself.

Thank you for describing the tragedy of the commons

There’s definitely lots of problems with the ruling class and wealth disparity. Perhaps the defining problems of our current age.

That being said, so many of the plebs suck. Like 2% will ruin everything for everyone.

And? It's common knowledge that the "reference" or "research" version of any codec is always quite high level to get development going and actually produce a working bitstream

There's an order of magnitude difference in speed requirements between file format parsing and image decoding, then another order of magnitude difference to video decoding. Even rav1d reuses dav1d's assembly (most of the actual runtime) to approach its speed.

The people who write DSLs for video codec asm, or who claim that it's fine to use intrinsics or X higher-level language and it will still be fast enough to be usable, are simply wrong and have never been able to demonstrate otherwise.

Having said that I do think you could write a DSL to generate safe performant asm for a video codec. Just not a platform-independent one. It would still have to be asm.

There was already attempt for dav1d to re-implement in rust by rav1d. It was hard to match performance: https://www.memorysafety.org/blog/rav1d-perf-bounty/

It hasn't had any proper quality/speed improvements in years. Only thing that has changed is updating deps and some bug fixes.

I think these conversations are directed by the parties funding the efforts. Example: "we (large company) want a fast AV2 decoder" -> they pay a specialized team to do it -> this team works in C for the most part, so it is done in C. If there were financial incentives to do it in Rust, they'd pay more for a Rust decoder.

Given Netflix's involvement with SV1-AV1, (not even that) indirectly, at least 1.