News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on We should start to add “ai.txt” as we do for “robots.txt”. Parent comment

Re:We should start to add “ai.txt” as we do for “robots.txt” by circuit10 on Wednesday May 10, 2023 @10:56AM (#35888305)
Yes, I feel like this person only read the title and not the text of the post and made an assumption
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:We should start to add “ai.txt” as we do for “robots.txt” by benatkin on Wednesday May 10, 2023 @11:41AM (#35888977)
Not an assumption. Just a response to the title of the article.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:We should start to add “ai.txt” as we do for “robots.txt” by circuit10 on Wednesday May 10, 2023 @12:03PM (#35889318)
They said "Using robots.txt as a model for anything doesn't work." but it does work for the case described in the text
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:We should start to add “ai.txt” as we do for “robots.txt” by benatkin on Wednesday May 10, 2023 @03:18PM (#35892145)
What works? This is an idea, not anything that's been throughly tried.
[ Parent | on HN ]