Don't blame site owners and service that is trying to help them. Blame the fact that 90% of today's Internet traffic is bots
Don't blame site owners and service that is trying to help them. Blame the fact that 90% of today's Internet traffic is bots
I guess whatever revenue you lose you make up for in a lower hosting bill. I just go to your competitor that doesn’t have the horrible UX. Usually those websites also tend to have much more optimized web pages too so it is an all around better experience.
They're also essentially a deanonymization reverse proxy that can track everyone's browsing history and decide whether you get to see websites based on social credit.
But I don't think they care if they block firefox users, or people who delete cookies, or VPN users, or Tor users, or people who resist fingerprinting, or people who block ads, etc.
- site owners can have protection as long as it doesn't inconvenience me.
Replace "me" with "legitimate users" and replace "inconvenience" with "very aggressively inconvenience or entirely block".
Then yeah you have it.
Many of my websites get 98% of their traffic from bots and bad actors, but it doesn’t really matter because the extra load of all these fake requests is absolutely negligible. I have a hard time understanding how someone would be bothered by an extra 50k requests a day. That’s less than a request per second. Most of the sites on even the weakest VM’s can easily do 10r/s these days.
if someone can foot the bill then I happily let them use it for free but its coming from own pocket