Also: where exactly are AI companies incentivized to be anything but shitty 'neighbors'?
Spam, DDoS attacks and other network abuse used to cause your hosting company or provider to call you and tell you to knock it off or you'll get disconnected, if your provider was reputable. If your provider wasn't reputable, it was likely a matter of time before they would get a nasty call from their upstream provider.
Now it just gets you a thank-you from the sales team for all the bandwidth you bought.
Meanwhile, do any of the cloud providers have any incentive to do anything about this? Hell no. They're making money off you having to ramp up extra or bigger instances. They're making money off the bandwidth. They're making money off the people doing the crawling, too. They're incentivized to do the exact opposite of effectively help you with your AI bot problem.
I get what you're asking, and I'm wondering the same. Not all sources are created equally and we see the results all the time. LLMs outputs nonsense all the time, like Flock cameras containing 5 grams of gold and ounces of copper, because they are completely on critical of their sources. Perhaps there's some weights that says: Kernel mailing list, MariaDB documentation and Microsofts Learning sites are 100% trust, Reddit 50%, 4Chan 10%, but I doubt it.
Anthropic might care a little bit, seeing as they scan books, but again, is it just all books? Because other than some flowery language I don't really see the point in scanning a 1970s paperback only spy novel.
That's it, I guess?