Instagram for web = no need for 4G proxies?

[melomal2]

Had this thought just now - will this make it easier to automate Instagram as per the old days seeing as web has gotten a lot of attention and updates. Plus, the increase in web use must have also gone up thus the chances of a shadowban or ban should be lowered.

 

[Fl0ded]

I really dont think that theyll go easier on monitoring, just because youre using the web version

 

[melomal2]

Sure but if the new rule of thumb has been to use 4G proxies for Instagram automation as it's all mobile but optimized the platform for web now too surely now you can carry on using proxies as before without having to pay for 4G

 

[BlackDesign]

Sure but if the new rule of thumb has been to use 4G proxies for Instagram automation as it's all mobile but optimized the platform for web now too surely now you can carry on using proxies as before without having to pay for 4G

What do you mean optimized the platform for web? What options did they add?

 

[Koder]

Just because you're using 'for web' doesn't mean they cannot detect the network type or the device used. they can probe it with IP subnets, device width, user agent, web standards compatibility and many other variables.

 

[MR.Spuf]

Had this thought just now - will this make it easier to automate Instagram as per the old days seeing as web has gotten a lot of attention and updates

No way web is easier than the app, don't even think about it.

Plus, the increase in web use must have also gone up thus the chances of a shadowban or ban should be lowered.

That's an incorrect theory mister, untested and unverified

 

[net307]

Web is easier to automate, why not you just spoof the useragent to a mobile user agent

 

[melomal2]

I can't link in here but a google of 'instagram web' in the news section shows that DMs and live streams can be viewed by web (for the C-virus lock down).

By all means this is untested and unverified and purely a speculation seeking some input for people here that would have more insight. I will be testing this week with a local proxy and phantombuster. I've previously used the bot on an instagram account and got shadowbanned therefore the test will be pretty straight forward - will I get shadowbanned or not using the same variables as before.

Just because you're using 'for web' doesn't mean they cannot detect the network type or the device used. they can probe it with IP subnets, device width, user agent, web standards compatibility and many other variables.

Are they that hell bent and set up that they would do this? I had a live chat conversation with a Facebook agent yesterday who told me that their business manager tools were not functioning that morning and would need to review everything later and so far the ads manager has been all over the place these last few days for me...

 

[InstaOmega]

Had this thought just now - will this make it easier to automate Instagram as per the old days seeing as web has gotten a lot of attention and updates. Plus, the increase in web use must have also gone up thus the chances of a shadowban or ban should be lowered.

the downside is web is making more calls and also not having access to contact info. Something to think about...