Post #655621
2026-03-14 18:56 UTC
Replies (10)
-
@neckspike@indiepocalypse.social 2026-03-14 21:21
@EvanHahn ohhh that's an interesting idea
-
@brennan@social.lol 2026-03-14 21:40
@EvanHahn I got one on my site! :D https://brennan.day/human.json
-
@brennan@social.lol 2026-03-15 07:09
@hugovk ah thanks for catching that typo!
-
@EvanHahn@bigshoulders.city 2026-03-15 13:25
@sethmlarson At a glance, it looks like the extension can pre-vouch. In other words, it doesn't verify that the vouchee has a human.json. Could be worth filing an issue: https://codeberg.org/robida/human.json/issues
-
@atna@eldritch.cafe 2026-03-15 08:56
@EvanHahn how to best avoid making this a signal to scrapers to add an unauthorised copy of your words to their training data? i want to signal to humans, but not to the fascist bootlickers making plausible sounding lie generators
-
@band@hachyderm.io 2026-03-15 14:18
@EvanHahn this seems similar to what `keybase` used to do well; and also reflects the GPG trust levels (that seems good) Q: in the documentation is the word "should" being used in the RFC 2119 sense?
-
@khinsen@scholar.social 2026-03-17 19:20
@EvanHahn I failed an "Are you human?" test today, so perhaps I don't qualify.
-
@soapdog@toot.cafe 2026-03-19 13:31
@EvanHahn this is good. Gonna add one to my site tonight
-
@soapdog@toot.cafe 2026-03-19 15:28
@EvanHahn just added a `human.json` to my website. Easy to do and helps a web made by humans <3
-
@publius@mastodon.sdf.org 2026-03-29 17:35
@EvanHahn This is interesting, but it appears that only one ownership-asserting URL is allowed, and protocol (http vs https) matters. Given that what I'm putting on the Web is mostly non-interactive documents, it doesn't make sense for me to require TLS. Am I just misunderstanding something, or can I not use the one humans.json file to assert ownership of the site, whether served over http or https?