Talk:Internet bot

  This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2019 and 11 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rusty858.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:05, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

  This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2019 and 12 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Claytmcc.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:05, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

  This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 13 January 2020 and 5 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Zioncash. Peer reviewers: TaeAndrews.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:05, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

  This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Katierstice.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:40, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Is this link broken for anyone other than me?

This article is a stub, need lots of enhancements, and better style. Theres personal comments, "news" and othre crap. --Tei

This article needs some diagrams...so can easily understand....---Hardik —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.96.185.222 (talk) 05:24, 30 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

I don't have a huge amount of time to work on this, but I'll clean it up a little. However, most of it appears to be total rubbish... 74.102.192.208 05:19, 12 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

I cleaned up the first couple of paragraphs, but it's still pretty much a stub. If I have time I'll come back later and see about writing some more. 74.102.192.208 05:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

I agree this article is awful! Looking back it was even worse, so congrats on the cleanup so far. I'm not sure why such a relatively important article is quite as bad as it is! - PocklingtonDan 16:24, 15 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

thank you for fixing, I think that this needs a real editing.

For starters, this business about bots doing things at "many times the speed of a human" needs to go. Computers are used to do lots of things faster than human can (for certain types of tasks.) That kinda the point of computing and has nothing to do with bots (though yes, they are software and yes they do what they do much faster than a human could.)

But the real problem isn't style or lack of eloquence but rather the matter of proper definition, which is a little tricky in this case since "bot" is not much more than a pop culture term. It refers mainly to computer programs that emulate human activity. However, from this messy article the reader may deduce that all sorts of computer programs may be considered as bots. A computer virus, for example, is one notable mistake. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.138.196.209 (talk) 23:07, 2 May 2007 (UTC).Reply

• The Tamil Nadu Forest Department website has recently changed their URLs and the links to their old site from references and notes used in the many Protected areas of Tamil Nadu articles and other south india related articles are now dead links. Is there a Bot that can go through these articles and update the links? Doing it all by hand will be a Herculean task.-Marcus 17:54, 7 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

webot.com is "...one recent example of utilizing bots to deliver personal media across the web from multiple sources..." that certainly can't help you because it's now just an external link to some kind of download manager. Bounce! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.171.30.195 (talk) 22:11, 15 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

The facts are kinda interesting. But I guess there are many other examples. Shouldn't the FreeRice section be moved to the dedicated page FreeRice? The link could point at the anchor there. Not that I find it offtopic in Internet bot (keep a pointer there), but I just think it belongs to FreeRice. -- skiidoo (talk) 10:49, 20 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

I just cleaned up this talk page as per WP:Talk page guidelines. Please remember that this page is not a forum and that all discussion should be related to improving the article.Jasper Deng (talk) 00:53, 19 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

I have removed the FreeRice section. I don't understand how this section could have stayed here for so long without anyone noticing that all the references are garbage. Two separate Blogspots are the only references other than a Digg page (which just links back to more garbage anyway), and both of these blogs have very very few comments. One of the bloggers even claims in one of his most recent posts that the bot being discussed on this Wikipedia page accounts for 40% of his web traffic (and he hasn't posted again in over a year and, again, has barely any comments or any indication that he's not just a random blogspot that the original editor created for fun). Even if legitimate sources are found, someone has to rewrite that section so it's not just a meandering, out of date news story. The core story of bots being used to exploit a charity is interesting, but right now it's just trivia that makes the article look even worse than it already is. --BranER (talk) 13:57, 25 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

The RFC 2616 and other oficial documents use also the term "user agent" for Intenet Bot,

The client which initiates a request. These are often browsers, editors, spiders (web-traversing robots), or other end user tools.

See also user agent. --Krauss (talk) 01:06, 25 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

I came to this article to learn about bots, because they are apparently large users of a website I manage. I find the article to be full of "sweeping statements", which may or may not be correct, I would not know. If any of these sweeping statements are true, or mainly true, they are worthy of inclusion, but they may not be true. There are only three links to sources or external articles - all relating to one small aspect of the article - and only one of these sources seems at all credible to me.

What the article needs is the attention of someone who is knowledgable about the topic, who would have no difficulty in revising it and citing a range of external sources. AlotToLearn (talk) 02:03, 12 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

I agree. FrankSier (talk) 19:56, 19 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hyun-Hee Heo, & Min-Sun Kim. (2013). The effects of multiculturalism and mechanistic disdain for robots in human-to-robot communication scenarios.

Interaction Studies, 14(1), 81–106.Lohan, E. S., Koivisto, M., Galinina, O., Andreev, S., Tolli, A., Destino, G., Costa, M., Leppanen, K., Koucheryavy, Y., & Valkama, M. (2018). Benefits of Positioning-Aided Communication Technology in High-Frequency Industrial IoT. IEEE Communications Magazine, 56(12), 142–148

Olivier, B. (2012). Cyberspace, simulation, artificial intelligence, affectionate machines and being human. Communicatio: South African Journal for Communication Theory & Research, 38(3), 261–278

The part of the article that talks about using bots to buy rare sneakers doesn't seem like it really belongs here. It's not a particularly common use for bots. Would it be okay to delete it? If not, we should at least move it out of the "helpful bots" section. I don't see why using bots to buy highly desired sneakers is considered any better than using bots to buy highly desired tickets (which is currently listed in the "malicious bots" section). Pikaryaa (talk) 21:08, 4 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

I think the sneaker-buying bot is an interesting example of a bot and is useful to have in the article. The use suggested for these bots could be described as malicious and/or helpful depending on who you are. This use also is not mentioned in the reference given. FrankSier (talk) 19:54, 19 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

I have been reading about the broader issue of retail bots or shop bots that are targeting many niche or high profile products. Sneakers are one example, but their use is widespread. There are examples such as high-end gaming GPUs that sell out instantly. These bots are often operated by groups who are making money from the resale. This is similar to their use in ticket scalping. I was thinking that maybe a new section for these bots would be good. Leecea (talk) 14:03, 27 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

I revised the definition and also made one of the sections more unbiased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hfbdo1111 (talk • contribs) 19:45, 3 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

synonym of seized 2409:40F0:2039:E9C7:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 16:07, 3 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

  This article is currently the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2024 and 13 December 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rayvenscry (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Lunarmoon22.

— Assignment last updated by Gcutrufello (talk) 17:30, 5 November 2024 (UTC)Reply