Hacker News Reader

Comment by irrational | Hacker News Reader

I've never heard of this. I wonder how many websites implement this. I tried a bunch of sites, but the only one I could find that had a humans.txt file was google:

Google is built by a large team of engineers, designers, researchers, robots, and others in many different sites across the globe. It is updated continuously, and built with more tools and technologies than we can shake a stick at. If you'd like to help us out, see google.com/careers.

View on HN

We do: https://esharesinc.com/humans.txt

It's part of every new engineer's first day or two. It's their first shipped PR to add themselves as a human.

Here's two examples: https://medium.com/humans.txt, https://www.python.org/humans.txt.

I found this as part of a user agent in logs for my webserver: https://disqus.com/humans.txt

And going over my logs for the past year, I only found 6 requests for 'humans.txt' on my server.

https://www.google.com/humans.txt

I do! https://redfern.me/humans.txt

It should really be human.txt...

A redirect to LinkedIn definitely isn't a proper implementation.

I agree. It was meant to be a bit... cheeky. Honest question though, is your issue with the fact that LinkedIn isn't plain-text, or the nature of the information that LinkedIn provides?

Neither. If any of us curl/wget/whatever that file, we gain no usable, plain text, human information. We then have to, manually, notice the redirect, take a manual action to follow up, and then those two further objections would apply. Why implement a text file spec that doesn't serve a text file? Even if all your text file contained was "Please see http://linkedin.com/example” it would be a correct implementation.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com