EDIT: And in case that isn't clear. Imagine you have a botnet, and all of the individual members create a twitter account. All of the twitter botnet accounts follow the 'master'. Who can tweet a command (and corresponding authentication key) to the botnet to say "follow chuck and do up to n things for him, here is his public key". Now Chuck suddenly has all these followers and when the time is right he tweets out his command, "ddos my greatest enemy" and adds his 'proof'. Off they go and blast his enemy. If he was only allotted one command then they all un-follow him.
Basically its social media for botnets.
The part where it gets weird though is that twitter already has massive botnets which run around in it retweeting things and what not. Which they do not shut down. So is that because they don't want to? Because they can't? or simply because it isn't worth their time? That is still an unresolved question for me.
Then you can double dip - sell what the content of the command/abort messages are (or just allow for 'padding' messages for advertising in between) and suddenly your botnet doubles as a completely legitimate social media firm
Super bonus round: Launder your money from botnet activities through the social media firm's books
(I am, of course, kidding)
Spam botnets ain't nothing new. They'll ways be around.
Before you came into my life
I missed you so bad
The one improvement to the public project I'd suggest is from my own. Instead of always starting from index 0, for each character position, increment the starting index by one until it loops around. That way all of the emojis get a roughly equal chance of screen time - depending on the entropy of the unencoded data, of course.
[1] I called mine "basemoji".
> For example, using Base64, up to 105 bytes of binary data can fit in a Tweet. With Base65536, 280 bytes are possible.
The C implementation is not a callable library, it's a binary. So in the same sense, it's a "Unix shell -accessible implementation".
When I refer to a Python C extension, I refer to it as a C implementation, even though the express purpose is to be callable from Python.
I can call Perl (and Python, and Ruby, and Javascript, and...) scripts from the shell, too. So those are now "Unix shell" as well?
I'm sure it's true, just curious why.
I fricking love qntm.
(anxiously excited)
Edit: If you didn't look at the repo, this encoding was made to post HATERIS replays on Twitter.
Edit: Only 3 points so far 𤆂𤆻𡚻𤆥㲺着遈𥮸㼉𤄛皲𤆻孈𤇆𡊾缎𓍌𤂻职𢪻郇膻𤅋𠅌傺𢊰䡪𤇄𤪤𡪻ꋇ𥆸𤶹膺𢡋聜𠆬𤪄膹𠬋㿄𠘬臀㾤冹𣾻𡈰𠭀䂹𤄔㼌𤚐𤢰𢢻𤇀𤞁䂺㬅𢉋𤮹㼆𣛄𡫀𤚒㡋𤢀ᖠ
ꋇ𤆻𠇇𢊻𤅷𓎼𢊻𤅵𓎬𤶸𤶸𤞑𤇋邼𣊻𤅛綌𣽋𤇅邌邬𤪀𠆃𣚻胈𡚻𤇄䂸𤁋而䂸𢙋𣻄𤄜𠢻𤇠𠪻㰄耬𢢻𣻄缨𠠋𤇁𤢱𡢻𤇂值𤞒𥆱冻ꎜ𤭺𤪰𤪲𡢻㿅𠟛𔗀邼而耬𥆑㼼翇
𤇃𢊻𤄻嶜𤄋𤇁𡊻𤄛𤆬𠲻𤆻𠆜𢮻𤆻ꊌ𢪻𤆻邌𤆻𤊻𤅋𤲥𣾻𤄋𥆸𣊻𤅛ꊌ𤆻𤆱炼綻𤋅𤅴薹𣪻𣊻𣽻𤇆𤚢𣺻赈𤇣綹𤻈𤇣𤾺𤇃悺𢦻𤂻𤅠㢹𣾻𤄛𤆓𤦹𤊻𤄰炜傼𤞻𢊻𣲻𣺻ꉌ邹𡊻𣹫𤅋𤇅𣾻𤇄𓎜𠚻𤊻𢊻𤉛𤅫𤂑𤃃𡉌𤵛𣹛𤁐𢉋𡉻𡡫𤇠𠞗𤇡𡊄𡒌𣼻燉𣼋𦄘炸邹㢸𠞻𠦻𡊻𣈻𡈻𣈛𡈛ꊺ𠆼𤂅𣻆𣫃𤮺𤊻𡉋㽻𣺬𣈛𡈋𤭻𤂲𣈻𤭻𤊼𢈛儛𡈛ᔺOverall though, I like it and look forward to Base131072 being possible!
- you're sending big byte arrays over json/xml
- you cannot switch to a more efficient medium
- (but you can make your remote counterpart adopt a different encoding)
- and you still need to maximize your throughput
then I guess you might consider base85 for utf-8 or base32k for utf-16?
Manage to make 1 point at 𤄻𣺻𣼋耈𣺻興𣼫兊𠨋𢪄𡚻𡢁𢙌𢚻𠛀𣪻栌𤄋𤯄𤆻𤆠𠞠𤪇𤆻𠙀𤅴𤆧𣪤𡚻𥪹炌𤆀㶸聙𡊰𠨌𡪻𤇅𤆀薠嫊䂔𔔌𥩋㲼耈𠊁繈倘𤨸𣾔㼬𤚱𢩋𣿋𡉌膹敃ꎹ𡩋肐𠝒𠚬醸聛㰩
Either way, it's a neat piece of thinking.
Pathological, certainly; "illegal"?
In their copyright-infringement case against Xio Interactive, a judge ruled that aspects of the game such as the dimensions of the game board (which the HATETRIS developer took pains to replicate) are protected by copyright.
Tetris is one of the most aggressively defended game IPs out there. Any recognizable clone of it is potentially infringing.
https://blogs.oracle.com/ksplice/the-1st-international-longe...
Twitter characters can actually store up to nearly 31 bits each, if you’re using the JSON API. (Or at least, this was true in 2010. I don’t know whether this is still true.)
http://blog.kevinalbs.com/base122
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13049329
Base-122 encoding is 87.5% efficient in UTF-8, better than anything listed in the base65536 repository’s comparison table.
https://github.com/girst/base65536
I'd appreciate some feedback.
It had a feature where it automatically would try a couple of compression algorithms on the text to be able to cram even more into a single tweet.
I don't think it has a practical use, but it was fun to make.