(#ckxyirq) @prologic@twtxt.net Germany was listed as āopposingā on https://fightchatcontrol.eu/ for a while, now itās back to āundecidedā. According to netzpolitik.org, itās still debated. Also according to that page, there could be an important vote on the EU level on October 13/14.
The green party and the (far) left are opposing this (at least in Germany). Sadly, Germany is leaning more right with every year ā¦ As for young people: The (far) left is the strongest party among young people, with the (far) right being the second strongest one. (https://www.tagesschau.de/wahl/archiv/2025-02-23-BT-DE/umfrage-alter.shtml) Is there cause for hope? I donāt know.
(#bhbo6cq) @bender@twtxt.net Yup! Fixing that now! š Also the Tags page and the size of the trags is intentional, as more posts are tagged with the same tag, those will result in larger size rendered tags in a kind of ātag cloudā ā At this this is the intention.
(#bhbo6cq) @bender@twtxt.net Ahh yes I see what you mean. no indicate of when the post was made right? That should be ideally displayed on the page somewhere? Would you expect it in the url as well, because not having /posts/yyyy/mm/dd/.... was actually intentional. But yeah I should figure out where to put some additional metadata on the page.
(#ce7zzfq) @alexonit@twtxt.alessandrocutolo.it Yeah I think weāre overstating the UNIX principles a bit here š¤£ I get what youāre trying to say though @zvava@twtxt.net š If I could go back in time and do it all over again, I would have gotten the Hash length correct and I would have used SHA-256 instead. But someone way smarter than me designed the Twt Hash spec, we adopted it and well here we are today, it worksā¢ š
(#mjjph3a) @alexonit@twtxt.alessandrocutolo.it Yes well Iām pretty big on self-hosting. Iāve even tried to start a small business/company around it (but thatās another story for another day!) ā Meanwhile I would encourage you to have a look at the work weāve done in Salty.im š
(#rsrlmzq) And I need to make something absolutely clear as well here. Twtxt was completely and utterly dead back in {Aug 2020](https://yarn.social/about.html) when I came across the spec and its simplicity and realised the lost opportunity. Since then weāve continued to grow a small but thriving community. The extensions weāve built over time have stood and lasted the test of time for the past ~5 years. We need not break things too badly, because what we have today and was designed years ago actually works quite wellā¢ (despite some flaws).
(#rsrlmzq) Put another way, what you are proposing/pushing for requires hundreds of lines of code to change across a half dozen or so clients and lots of breaking changes, not to mention unknowns.
What I want us to do is make only a few half dozen or so lines of code changes to our clients and minimize the breaking changes and unknowns.
(#rsrlmzq) @zvava@twtxt.net Going to have to hard disagree here Iām sorry. a) no-one reads the raw/plain twtxt.txt files, the only time you do is to debug something, or have a stick beak at the comments which most clients will strip out and ignore and b) Iām sorry youāve completely lost me! Iām old enough to pre-date before Linux became popular, so Iām not sure what UNIX principles you think are being broken or violated by having a Twt Subject (Subject) whose contents is a cryptographic content-addressable hash of the āthingāā¢ youāre replying to and forming a chain of other replies (a thread).
Iām sorry, but the simplest thing to do is to make the smallest number of changes to the Spec as possible and all agree on a āMagic Dateā for which our clients use the modified function(s).
(#rsrlmzq) @bender@twtxt.net Well honestly, this is just it. My strong position on this is quite simple:
Do the simplest thing that could work.
Itās one of the age old UNIX philosphies.
Therefore, the simplest thingā¢ to do here is to just increase the hash length, mark a magicā¢ date/time as @lyse@lyse.isobeef.org has indicated and call it a day. Weāll then be fine for a few hundred years, at which point thereāll be no-one left alive to give a shitā¢ anyway š¤£
(#7fsi7yq) @alexonit@twtxt.alessandrocutolo.it My problem is I donāt see a world where we donāt employ some form of cryptography to use as keys for threads in databases and other such things honestly. Iām not going to use url#timestamp as keys.
Oh man, if the EU actually rolled out this horribd idea called ChatControl that actually threatens the security and privacy of secure e2e encrypted messaging like Signalā¢, fuck me, Iām out š¤¦āāļø Iāll just rage quit the IT industry and become a luddite. Iām out.
(#o2lsjcq) @bender@twtxt.net Yes I did about a week or so ago. It took me a lot of effort to get the content even rendered in the first place. LOL I had to basically export my blog as HTML (can you believe that?!) ā The Hugo export just didnāt work at all š¤£
I just created a zs blogging template which Iām going to use for https://prologic.blog and I might starting writing long-form again soonā¢ š So far the ābloggingā template/engine (if you weill) is quite simple. It comprises essentially of an index.md a prehook and a few utilities:
Thatās kind of my position on this. If we are going to make significant changes in the threading model, letās keep content based addressing, but also improve the user experience. Answering your question, yes I think we can do some combination of both.
(#3h7w7ca) @alexonit@twtxt.alessandrocutolo.it Holy fuck! š¤£ I just realized how bad my typing was in my reply before š¤£ š¤¦āāļø So sorry about that haha š I blame the stupid iPhone on-screen keyboard āØļø
(#onabtqq) @alexonit@twtxt.alessandrocutolo.it Maybe I misunderstood, but you have to keep the timezone offsets in mind. Simple alphabetical sorting of the timestamp strings does not yield a truly chronological order. It might be close enough for you, though.