Google, Anthropic and others to support new AI crawling opt-out standard
Comments on “Google, Anthropic and others to support new AI crawling opt-out standard”
Claim-checked. Scored by all three judges, and its checkable claims were compared with the sources it cites. How far stories are checked
Google, Microsoft, Anthropic and OpenAI say they will honor a new robots.txt directive that lets a site block all generative-AI training crawlers with one entry, replacing per-provider rules. Engadget says the draft comes from Anthropic's Kevin Kelley and is before the IETF; it would not block search indexing. Microsoft also plans an "AI Grounding" setting for answer-time fetches. OpenAI and Microsoft reportedly ship support within months, Google next year; Meta has not committed. Most timing and scope details remain unverified.
Why it ranked
No. 20 of 43 with a score of 0.64. The panel rated it highest on new information (0.85) and audience breadth (0.78), lowest on technical depth (0.45). Placed No. 20, No. 13 by score alone: the ninth AI & machine learning story of the day (−0.080), and close to “AI crawlers in robots.txt: a study of the top 10k sites (2026)”, No. 10 on Thursday 29 October 2026 (−0.010). The placement terms move stories; they are not part of the score.
- AI judgeJudge 2claude-haiku-5-5
- Major AI firms jointly backing a robots.txt extension for AI training opt-outs is significant and actionable for web operators and builders, though it is a proposal with limited technical detail and includes a promotional sponsor block.
- AI judgeJudge 3gpt-5.6-luna
- A broadly relevant policy and ecosystem development affecting web publishers, AI providers, and data access. The article reports concrete plans but offers limited technical detail and relies on announcements rather than primary proposal text.
Each judge wrote its line after answering the rubric, with the site and the author still hidden. Every answer behind this is in the table under Score.
Score
0.64total under rubric v2.3
- Significance0.62
- Reader interest0.73
- Audience breadth0.78
- Practical relevance0.69
- Substantiated0.49
- Technical depth0.45
- New information0.85
- Counts against: Promotional0.15
- Counts against: Overclaim0.15
Each judge’s answer per question (0–1), their mean and spread, and what the question adds to the score (weight × mean).
| Question | Judge 1 | Judge 2 | Judge 3 | Mean | Spread | Weight | Contribution (weight times mean) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SignificanceHow much does this change what people in tech know or can do? | 0.70 | 0.55 | 0.62 | 0.62 | 0.15 | +0.24 | +0.150 |
| Reader interestWould a well-informed senior engineer or tech founder want to read this today, and likely pass it on? | 0.62 | 0.80 | 0.78 | 0.73 | 0.18 | +0.26 | +0.191 |
| Audience breadthHow many people who build technology does it concern? | 0.86 | 0.67 | 0.82 | 0.78 | 0.19 | +0.13 | +0.102 |
| Practical relevanceHow useful is it to someone who builds software or tech products? | 0.70 | 0.70 | 0.68 | 0.69 | 0.02 | +0.22 | +0.153 |
| SubstantiatedHow well is it backed? Consider whether it is the primary source, and whether its main claims come with data, code, a demo, a reproducible method or citations. | 0.40 | 0.45 | 0.62 | 0.49 | 0.22 | +0.05 | +0.025 |
| Technical depthHow technically substantive is it? | 0.65 | 0.35 | 0.34 | 0.45 | 0.31 | +0.05 | +0.022 |
| New informationDoes it contain information absent from the stories covered in the last 7 days (list provided)? | 0.84 | 0.80 | 0.92 | 0.85 | 0.12 | +0.05 | +0.043 |
| PromotionalIs it mainly marketing with little substance (a press release, ad or sponsored post with no real information)? A launch post that carries real news is not promotional. | 0.18 | 0.10 | 0.18 | 0.15 | 0.08 | −0.19 | −0.029 |
| OverclaimDo the headline or conclusions claim more than the body supports? | 0.21 | 0.15 | 0.08 | 0.15 | 0.13 | −0.11 | −0.016 |
| Sum of contributions | +0.639 | ||||||
| Claim-check penalty | 0.000 | ||||||
| Total, as published | 0.639 | ||||||
Spread is the highest minus the lowest judge answer. marks a spread above 0.40: the judges disagree, and the story is marked contested.
The badge for this ranking, for the author's page or anyone's: one line of HTML, and it links back here.
<a href="https://rubric.hrih.si/editions/2026-11-02/20/"><img src="https://rubric.hrih.si/badge/2026-11-02/20.svg" alt="Ranked #20 on Rubric, 2 Nov 2026" width="238" height="28"></a>Claim check
Claim check: 2 matches source · 1 no source given · 5 couldn’t check. Each claim is compared with the source the article itself cites; a flag is published only when both checkers agree.
Couldn’t checkDate
Google, Microsoft, Anthropic and OpenAI announced plans to support an upcoming website crawling standard that lets website operators block AI developers from using their content to train models.
The source was unreachable, paywalled or too long, or the two checkers disagreed.
The article says “Google LLC, Microsoft Corp., Anthropic PBC and OpenAI Group PBC today announced plans to support an upcoming website crawling standard”
The source says No passage could be compared.
Source cited by the article: openai.com/index/helping-websites-express-ai-training-preferences
Couldn’t checkNumber
The standard would allow website operators to block all scrapers that collect training data for generative AI models with a single robots.txt entry.
The source was unreachable, paywalled or too long, or the two checkers disagreed.
The article says “It would allow website operators to block all scrapers that collect training data for generative AI models with a single robots.txt entry”
The source says No passage could be compared.
Source cited by the article: openai.com/index/helping-websites-express-ai-training-preferences
Couldn’t checkQuote
The setting would not apply to models that perform exclusively non-generative tasks.
The source was unreachable, paywalled or too long, or the two checkers disagreed.
The article says “The setting wouldn’t apply to models that “perform exclusively non-generative tasks”
The source says No passage could be compared.
Source cited by the article: openai.com/index/helping-websites-express-ai-training-preferences
Couldn’t checkDate
Google, Microsoft, Anthropic and OpenAI have already submitted a draft of their proposal to the Internet Engineering Task Force, which maintains the Robots Exclusion Protocol.
The source was unreachable, paywalled or too long, or the two checkers disagreed.
The article says “They have already submitted a draft version of their proposal to the Internet Engineering Task Force, the nonprofit that maintains the Robots Exclusion Protocol”
The source says No passage could be compared.
Source cited by the article: openai.com/index/helping-websites-express-ai-training-preferences
Matches sourceVersion
Microsoft will provide a crawling setting called AI Grounding for cases where an AI model accesses a webpage to answer a user question rather than collect training data.
The cited source says the same thing.
The article says “it will also provide a crawling setting called AI Grounding. It’s designed for situations where an AI model seeks to access a webpage in order to answer a user question”
The source says “AI Grounding is a separate page-level preference from Microsoft that lets you manage how your content is used to help inform generated responses”
Source cited by the article: blogs.bing.com/search/2026/10/your-content-your-choice-clearer-preferences-for-training-and-grounding
Matches sourceNumber
Microsoft's AI Grounding setting will also extend to third-party AI tools that use Microsoft technologies to process prompts.
The cited source says the same thing.
The article says “The feature will also extend to third-party AI tools that use Microsoft technologies to process prompts”
The source says “excludes grounding services Microsoft provides to third parties, such as Web IQ and grounding through API access in”
Source cited by the article: blogs.bing.com/search/2026/10/your-content-your-choice-clearer-preferences-for-training-and-grounding
No source givenDate
OpenAI and Microsoft intend to add support for the standard in the coming months, while Google will follow next year.
The article gives no link or citation for it.
The article says “Both the ChatGPT developer and Microsoft intend to add support for the crawling standard in the coming months, while Google will follow suit sometime next year”
The source says No source to compare with.
Couldn’t checkQuote
Meta expressed support for the idea behind the standard but has not committed to implementing it.
The source was unreachable, paywalled or too long, or the two checkers disagreed.
The article says “Meta Platforms Inc. expressed support for the idea behind the technology but hasn’t yet committed to implementing it”
The source says No passage could be compared.
Source cited by the article: theverge.com/tech/1023763/openai-google-microsoft-ai-scraping-standard-opt-out
Also covered by
Elsewhere
Elsewhere: HN 2 pts, not on front page
Recorded for context only, checked 2 Nov 2026, 05:46 UTC. It played no part in the ranking.