Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tell HN: We should start to add “ai.txt” as we do for “robots.txt”

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 296 posts

Re: Tell HN: We should start to add “ai.txt” as we do for “robots.txt”

#51

Post by none_to_remain »

samwillis wrote: post #6

Using robots.txt as a model for anything doesn't work. All a robots.txt is is a polite request to please follow the rules in it, there is no "legal" agreement to follow those rules, only a moral imperative. Robots.txt has failed as a system, if it hadn't we wouldn't have captchas or Cloudflare. In the age of AI we need to better understand where copyright applies to it, and potentially need reform of copyright to ali…

Robots.txt is meant as an aid to crawlers. "This stuff is not useful to index," rather than a blocking mechanism

Re: Tell HN: We should start to add “ai.txt” as we do for “robots.txt”

#52

Post by revicon »

matsemann wrote: post #35

Reading the title I thought you meant the opposite. Aka, an ai.txt file that disallow ai to train or use your data similar to robots.txt (but for cases when you still want to be crawled, just not extrapolated)

Feels like an enhancement to a sitemap.xml could be a better way to go here.

https://developers.google.com/search/docs/crawling-indexing/...

Re: Tell HN: We should start to add “ai.txt” as we do for “robots.txt”

#53

Post by mnot »

jruohonen wrote: post #4
a2800276 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, yes, but what about RFC 5226?

I am not sure about that but I think IANA is quite open to recognizing new well-known URIs: https://www.iana.org/assignments/well-known-uris/well-known-... Basically, assuming that you have a spec, I think it amounts to filing a PR or discussing it on a mailing list.

You can open an issue: https://github.com/protocol-registries/well-known-uris

Re: Tell HN: We should start to add “ai.txt” as we do for “robots.txt”

#56

Post by safety1st »

samwillis wrote: post #6

Using robots.txt as a model for anything doesn't work. All a robots.txt is is a polite request to please follow the rules in it, there is no "legal" agreement to follow those rules, only a moral imperative. Robots.txt has failed as a system, if it hadn't we wouldn't have captchas or Cloudflare. In the age of AI we need to better understand where copyright applies to it, and potentially need reform of copyright to ali…

> "We" now want stricter copyright law when it comes to AI, but at the same time shorter copyright duration...

This gross generalization of other people's views on important issues is really offensive.

My view is that the Copyright Act of 1976 had it about right when they established the duration of copyright. My view is that members of Congress were handsomely rewarded by a specific corporation to carve out special exceptions to this law because they wanted larger profits. "We" didn't call the Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 the "Mickey Mouse Act" for nothing. It's also no coincidence that Disney is now the largest media company in the world.

Reducing copyright term extension has everything to do with restoring competition and creativity to our economy, and reversing corruption that borders on white collar crime. It has nothing to do with AI. Don't recruit me into some bullshit argument that rewrites history and entrenches Disney's ill-gotten monopoly.

Re: Tell HN: We should start to add “ai.txt” as we do for “robots.txt”

#58

Post by alphanullmeric »

gavinhoward wrote: post #44
rhn_mk1 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The barrier to running an AI model is getting lower every day, so the threshold for ignoring copyright is getting lower with it.

You are mistaken if you think companies will allow common people to ignore copyright on their IP. The only IP that will be allowed to be stolen is that of other common people.

You can’t steal an idea.

Re: Tell HN: We should start to add “ai.txt” as we do for “robots.txt”

#60

Post by casey2 »

safety1st wrote: post #56
samwillis wrote: post #6

Using robots.txt as a model for anything doesn't work. All a robots.txt is is a polite request to please follow the rules in it, there is no "legal" agreement to follow those rules, only a moral imperative. Robots.txt has failed as a system, if it hadn't we wouldn't have captchas or Cloudflare. In the age of AI we need to better understand where copyright applies to it, and potentially need reform of copyright to ali…

> "We" now want stricter copyright law when it comes to AI, but at the same time shorter copyright duration... This gross generalization of other people's views on important issues is really offensive. My view is that the Copyright Act of 1976 had it about right when they established the duration of copyright. My view is that members of Congress were handsomely rewarded by a specific corporation to carve out special…

Disney has a monopoly on media because they still have the copyright to their IP from the 20s? LOL!

Companies that can leverage this new wave of AI will have, in reality, 1000x the advantage that you believe Disney has.

Post reply on HN