The sanity.io page writes:

> serving agents a bunch of HTML might just bloat their context window.

That's only true if you assume the the agent can't extract the useful text before it goes into the model as tokens. Your browser's reader mode uses heuristics to identify what the actual content is in a large HTML response and strips away the rest.

To me this is a far better approach than worrying about an llms.txt files or looking at HTTP headers to see if markdown is preferred. Such efforts could easily be directed at ensuring the useful content on your site carries the appropriate markup for an agent or any other tool to extract it. And it would require less work to implement for the publisher of the content.

> I got tired of pointing at six different sources to back a single recommendation. WHATWG for HTML. WCAG for accessibility. IETF for headers. schema.org for structured data. MDN, web.dev, Google Search Central for everything else.

> There was no single, opinionated, platform-agnostic spec for "what does a modern website actually need to do?"

> So I wrote one.

[1] https://www.linkedin.com/posts/jdevalk_the-website-specifica...

This isn't difficult and I think the reason it hasn't been done is that publishers want clicks and ad views. Which begs the question: why would they start doing it for agents?

Regarding the bad actors point, that's been possible for a long time - e.g. serving up different content for search engine crawlers than the user sees when they click through. If I remember correctly, there was a time Google penalised sites that did this.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48343683

Points: 352

# Comments: 142

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48101509

Points: 3

# Comments: 0

It's a shame that because CSS is still primarily for browser use and styling, we don't get nice things like the ability to select based on text content like we can with XPath. My understanding is that this was proposed but didn't make it into the spec because it could lead to performance issues in a browser rendering context.

[1] https://speakerdeck.com/keyvan/parsing-html-with-php-8-dot-4...

> Marx, then, argued that the more we subordinate our creative needs to dead capital and its goals, the less we are. But this is also true when we subordinate our creative needs to revolutionary goals in the future. Why? Because the future is non-existential, it does not exist; it is as dead as capital.

https://www.medialens.org/2023/head-trapped-descartes-dawkin...

The author's book, A short book about ego, is also very good.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47562154

Points: 4

# Comments: 0

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47300440

Points: 38

# Comments: 14

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47177489

Points: 3

# Comments: 1

> If you only care about human rights when its politically expedient to do so, do you really care about human rights?

I don't really see how you reached that conclusion from the quote. He's not saying it would be inconvenient, he's saying such an action could lead to a worse outcome for the people of the country. If he didn't care about their human rights, and was happy for them to be bombed, he'd go ahead and do it. You might disagree with his reasoning, but it's not showing lack of care.

> You can still protest to signal support for usa to keep its hardline stance on Iran or to increase measures.

If you care about the wellbeing of Iranian people, you have to acknowledge that a "hardline stance" of sanctions also contributes to their suffering. I'm not sure why you'd expect to see people out on the streets asking for more of that.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langlo/article/PIIS2214-1...

> You can also protest to make sure the horrors aren't forgotten and to signal to those suffering in Iran that they aren't alone.

True, but as a citizen you have much less moral responsibility to protest that than a situation your government and taxes are supporting. Which probably explains why you don't see as many people out on the streets about that.

I'd say it's also tricky in such situations to protest and not have your protest co-opted to justify aggression. Chomsky made this point on Iran: "Suppose I criticise Iran. What impact does that have? The only impact it has is in fortifying those who want to carry out policies I don’t agree with, like bombing."

https://www.ft.com/content/afc74988-8c96-11e2-aed2-00144feab...

> "...pursuant to the current legislation governing foundations, the Board of Directors of the Nobel Foundation is legally accountable for ensuring that [...] the Nobel Peace Prize is awarded in accordance with the criteria stipulated by Alfred Nobel."

This was from a press release from 2012 that now appears to be deleted from their site: https://web.archive.org/web/20120601234000/http://www.nobelp...

I think a serious examination of Nobel's will and how the Nobel Committee chose Machado over other candidates would make the Norwegian Committee look very bad. It would also show that the Swedish Nobel Foundation failed in its legal duty to ensure the will was respected. A result that would embarrass both Norway and Sweden. So what you get instead is quick dismissal of any such complaints.

The Swedish press has also been terrible in reporting this. I saw articles trying to make Assange out to be stupid for filing in Sweden. Journalists either didn't bother reading the Wikileaks press release, or wanted to keep their readers in the dark about it.

Here's one example from Aftonbladet (Sweden's largest news site):

> WikiLeaks alleges that Assange sent his letter to Swedish authorities, although it is the Norwegian Nobel Committee that appoints peace laureates. ("Wikileaks påstår att Assange skickat sitt brev till svenska myndigheter, även om det är den norska Nobelkommittén som utser fredspristagare.")

There's a book by Norwegian lawyer Fredrik Heffermehl that goes into the 2012 challenge to the Nobel Foundation. I've only skimmed it, but looks quite interesting: The Real Nobel Peace Prize - A Squandered Opportunity to Abolish War https://www.kobo.com/se/en/ebook/the-real-nobel-peace-prize-...

But it's now available for anyone interested. Extract below:

CRIMINAL COMPLAINT

Submitted to:

• Ekobrottsmyndigheten (Swedish Economic Crime Authority), Hantverkargatan 15, 112 21 Stockholm.

• Krigsbrottsenheten (Swedish War Crimes Unit), Kungsholmsgatan 43, 106 75 Stockholm.

[snipped]

The political decision of the Norwegian selection committee does not suspend the fiduciary duty of Swedish funds administrators. Where a decision by the selection committee is in flagrant conflict with the explicit peace purpose of the will, or where there is evidence that the awardee will use or is using the prize to promote or facilitate the crime of aggression, crimes against humanity, or war crimes, administrators must resolve the conflict in favor of the will. They must safeguard the endowment by declining to disburse funds. The Norwegian committee’s selection does not grant them criminal immunity.

More: https://file.wikileaks.org/files/2025/machado29-dist.pdf