The Rise of Browser-Based Crawlers and the Fight for Server Resources

In late 2025, Chris Siebenmann, administrator of the Wandering Thoughts blog and CSpace wiki, found himself at the center of an escalating conflict between content providers and automated data harvesting systems. What began as an experiment in resource management has evolved into a broader commentary on the changing nature of web traffic and the challenges facing independent publishers in an era dominated by large language models and their insatiable appetite for training data.

The core issue is deceptively simple: a growing number of high-volume crawlers are masquerading as mainstream browsers while operating from cloud provider networks. These automated systems, which Siebenmann suspects are primarily gathering data for large language model training, have created an unsustainable load on smaller websites. The problem is compounded by the fact that these crawlers claim to be legitimate browsers like Firefox or Chrome, making traditional blocking methods ineffective.

Siebenmann's response has been to implement a blanket blocking policy for all browser traffic originating from server and cloud provider IP ranges. This approach, while effective at reducing server load, has created an unintended consequence: legitimate users who access the internet through cloud-based services or virtual private servers find themselves unable to reach the content they seek. The administrator acknowledges this collateral damage, offering a contact point for those who believe they've been incorrectly blocked.

The situation reflects a broader shift in how the internet functions. What was once a relatively straightforward ecosystem of human users and search engine crawlers has become increasingly complex, with sophisticated automated systems operating at scales that can overwhelm individual servers. The rise of large language models has created a new category of web traffic that doesn't fit neatly into existing categories of legitimate or illegitimate access.

This challenge is particularly acute for independent content creators and smaller websites. Unlike major platforms with substantial infrastructure budgets, individual bloggers and small site operators must carefully manage their resources. When automated systems consume disproportionate amounts of bandwidth and processing power, the financial and technical burden falls directly on the content provider.

The blocking experiment raises important questions about the future of web accessibility. As more users rely on cloud-based services for their internet access, blanket bans on cloud provider networks could become increasingly problematic. The tension between protecting server resources and maintaining open access to information represents a fundamental challenge for the decentralized nature of the web.

There's also the question of transparency and accountability. Siebenmann's approach of requiring affected users to contact him directly for access creates a barrier that may deter some legitimate visitors. While this manual verification process helps ensure that only real users gain access, it also places the burden of proof on the user rather than the automated system.

The broader implications extend beyond individual websites. As large language models continue to evolve and their training requirements grow, the pressure on web infrastructure will likely increase. Content providers may need to develop more sophisticated methods of distinguishing between legitimate human traffic and automated data harvesting, while also considering the impact on users who access the internet through non-traditional means.

Siebenmann's experiment represents one possible approach to this challenge, but it's unlikely to be the final solution. The web's decentralized nature means that different sites will need to find their own balance between accessibility and resource management. Some may choose to implement more granular blocking systems, while others might explore alternative approaches such as rate limiting or requiring authentication for certain types of access.

The situation also highlights the need for better standards and protocols for automated web access. If large language model training companies and other automated systems operated with more transparency about their intentions and implemented reasonable rate limiting, many of these conflicts could be avoided. However, the current landscape suggests that voluntary cooperation may be insufficient to address the problem.

For now, users who find themselves blocked by such measures face a frustrating choice: either find alternative means of accessing the content they seek or attempt to navigate the verification process required to regain access. This creates a fragmented web experience where access to information becomes dependent on the specific network configuration of the user.

The experiment conducted by Siebenmann serves as a reminder that the infrastructure of the internet is not infinite. Every automated request consumes resources, and when those requests occur at scale, they can have real impacts on the ability of content creators to maintain their online presence. As the web continues to evolve, finding sustainable models for content distribution and access will become increasingly important.

What's clear is that the current approach of allowing unrestricted automated access is unsustainable. Whether through technical solutions, policy changes, or new standards for automated web access, the internet community will need to find ways to balance the needs of content providers with the legitimate requirements of automated systems and the rights of users to access information. The experiment at Wandering Thoughts represents just one attempt to navigate this complex landscape, but it's likely to be followed by many others as the web continues to adapt to new technological realities.