if I had a lot more time I think I might write a book on my ideas about "adversarial automation".

The idea that the point of computers is to help the humans do their job faster and easier, and sometimes the computer or the software on it is the enemy in that battle.

because I see a lot of people approaching automation from this attitude of "software/sites should have APIs so that users can write software to automate it!"
and while that's not wrong, exactly, it's also not the attitude I think makes the most sense, you know?

We do not ask for access. We don't need to get permission to be able to automate our tasks.

There is always API 0: acting like a human/browser/user.

The first API is "fuck you I'm doing it anyway". Any additional API the program provides is merely a helpful shortcut

You see the point of this a lot in API design, where a company is like "okay we made an API but we limited it a bunch because we are scared about cheaters/bots/scrapers/whatever", while the things they limit are things a user clicking links can do in 2 seconds.

like, if your API doesn't provide me a follow_user() call, but the user can follow anyone by clicking one link?

Your lack of a follow_user() call is not going to stop me. I'm just going to click the link, automatically.
Having an API 1.0 doesn't mean API 0 goes away.

And I think this is an under-discussed part of automation because it's associated with spammers and such, but they're only one possible user of this. By making it better known it can get used for more legitimate uses
The basic philosophy of adversarial automation is that the software/website is the enemy.
@foone I've also seen it called "adversarial interoperability".
Kevin Karhan :verified: (@[email protected])

One thing that really pisses me off personally is the #regression in terms of #Messenger #Apps. My personal distaste and dislike for #proprietary, #SingleVendor & #SingleProvider #services like #Signal [¹](https://infosec.space/@kkarhan/114234551915193036) [²](https://infosec.space/@kkarhan/114935952643402592), #Telegram, #Discord [³](https://infosec.space/@kkarhan/114865723904157014) [⁴](https://social.treehouse.systems/@krutonium/115157611977216372), #WhatsApp [⁵](https://infosec.space/@kkarhan/114873895410403238), #Slack, #MicrosoftTeams, #discord [⁶](https://infosec.space/@kkarhan/116063760849048926)[⁷](https://infosec.space/@kkarhan/115736223551632209) etc. aside: - *WHY* is there no #CrossProvider #Messenger to handle that shite? - *WHY* does everyone of these shitty providers think people want to download their #bloated #WebApp that takes up triple digit Megabytes if not entire Gigabytes and will gobble up all the #RAM and #CPU each of them can?? This problem ain't new and *already got [solved for corporate social media](https://infosec.space/@kkarhan/114862619013462466) ages ago!* (Not to mention actually good messengers!) - And no, [bridges](https://toots.ch/@dalai/114862754556459439) *[don't](https://swecyb.com/@troed/114862774972645542) count*! - I mean `API 0` - [style](https://digipres.club/@foone/112685423773959519) access because obviously [none of the platforms](https://digipres.club/@foone/112685414638522984) will *allow, endorse or support such an endeavour* and [*actively fight the developers and users*](https://digipres.club/@foone/112685441496803574) ! So yeah, consider this a call for a @[email protected] / #Gajim or @[email protected] / #Pidgin *for garbage platforms!* - Cuz back in the day we had *way worse messengers* yet people actually made #AIM, #ICQ, #MSN, #QQ, #IRC & #XMPP work just fine from one single *"phat" client*! - Can we please get that back? Cuz #WastefulComputing pisses me off! #api0 #Enshittification

Infosec.Space