Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #168874 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2023-01-22 14:28 -0500 |
| Last post | 2023-01-26 12:48 -0600 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 163 — 28 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 14:28 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 20:56 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 15:17 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 05:25 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 09:06 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 17:14 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 08:42 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 21:27 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 13:03 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 13:24 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 14:03 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 17:52 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 13:59 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-01-23 17:57 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 12:08 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 17:49 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 14:59 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 18:20 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 15:39 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 19:18 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2023-01-23 20:10 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2023-01-26 09:04 -0700
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-01-22 19:56 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 15:26 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-01-22 22:06 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 11:59 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 15:27 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 12:31 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 12:33 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 15:34 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 12:45 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 13:18 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 13:38 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 13:30 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 13:17 -0600
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-01-23 20:31 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-01-24 00:31 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-01-24 00:44 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 19:48 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 07:23 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-03 20:41 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-02-04 17:32 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2023-02-05 06:35 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-02-05 08:32 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-02-05 08:41 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-02-05 08:49 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-02-05 08:54 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-02-05 08:28 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2023-01-22 14:17 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-01-22 23:35 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Simon.Says.Yes@gfdedsed.hgtgfrfd - 2023-01-23 00:50 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 19:58 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Simon.Says.Yes@gfdedsed.hgtgfrfd - 2023-01-23 01:33 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-01-23 02:39 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2023-01-22 17:03 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Simon.Says.Yes@gfdedsed.hgtgfrfd - 2023-01-23 01:30 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-01-22 21:05 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-01-23 02:44 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2023-01-23 03:21 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-23 11:15 +0100
PGP signatures and BASE64 posts (Was : Why is there not a single good JSON library for C?) Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 12:47 +0000
Re: PGP signatures and BASE64 posts (Was : Why is there not a single good JSON library for C?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-23 14:48 +0100
Re: PGP signatures and BASE64 posts (Was : Why is there not a single good JSON library for C?) Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-01-23 16:52 +0300
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 09:19 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-23 17:45 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 18:09 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-01-23 23:44 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 19:24 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 16:49 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-01-24 13:04 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 17:19 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 14:33 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-01-26 18:28 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Manu Raju <MR@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-26 18:44 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.com> - 2023-01-28 23:42 +0300
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-26 11:56 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-01-26 20:37 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.com> - 2023-01-28 23:37 +0300
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-01-28 22:27 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-01-26 18:52 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-01-25 00:33 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 17:51 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-25 11:03 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-24 15:02 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 17:24 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 14:36 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-25 00:21 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 15:28 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 06:43 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-25 15:56 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-01-25 15:08 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2023-01-25 07:56 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2023-01-25 22:48 +0200
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 13:50 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-27 11:46 -0600
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-28 13:39 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-28 11:42 -0600
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-01-28 12:15 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-28 23:24 -0600
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 12:10 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 12:12 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 12:05 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 13:46 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2023-01-23 20:06 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 17:11 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2023-01-25 09:57 +0200
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2023-01-25 14:08 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 22:05 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 18:15 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 15:36 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 19:43 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 16:56 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 20:12 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 17:45 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 16:58 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 17:02 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-24 15:15 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 14:35 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-24 18:32 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C Jim Jackson <jj@franjam.org.uk> - 2023-01-25 22:56 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 20:09 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2023-01-25 09:53 +0200
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2023-01-25 00:13 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2023-01-25 20:41 +0200
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2023-01-25 14:08 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 11:35 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-26 00:18 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 15:33 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2023-01-29 01:08 +0200
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2023-01-29 13:53 -0800
Apology to Öö Tiib (was Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 15:31 -0800
Re: Apology to Öö Tiib (was Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C?) Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2023-01-25 23:17 -0800
A comment about dogwhistles Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2023-01-29 13:47 -0800
Re: A comment about dogwhistles Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2023-03-03 15:05 +0200
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-01-26 15:16 +0300
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 10:37 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2023-01-29 20:57 -0700
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-29 23:04 -0600
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 21:09 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-01-23 02:41 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-01-23 11:35 +0300
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Opus <ifonly@youknew.org> - 2023-01-23 19:22 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 18:18 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 16:57 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 18:23 -0600
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 20:35 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 21:37 -0600
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-01-25 11:49 +0300
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 12:32 -0600
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Manu Raju <MR@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-25 18:56 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-01-25 18:45 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 13:39 -0600
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 17:07 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 17:54 -0600
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-01-26 00:04 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 19:27 -0600
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-26 02:50 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-26 03:07 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-01-26 04:34 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-26 04:56 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-26 05:18 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-26 05:23 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-26 12:48 -0600
Page 7 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 Next page →
| From | Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-25 20:09 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C |
| Message-ID | <tqsjs9$t13e$1@bluemanedhawk.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #169055 |
On 1/25/23 17:56, Jim Jackson wrote: > I admire your perseverance in getting so far!!!! I kill filed him a > while ago - I seriously doubt he will have anything useful to say. Bruh -- ⚗︎ | /blu.mɛin.dʰak/ | shortens to "Hawk" | he/him/his/himself/Mr. bluemanedhawk.github.io Apologies if this message got encoded into octoctal. Blame Thunderbird for not behaving correctly with Unicode and PGP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-25 09:53 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <878rhrkq26.fsf@zotaspaz.fatphil.org> |
| In reply to | #168937 |
Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes: > Apparently "octoctal" is an extremely obscure term for an encoding that > is almost universally called base64. Did you seriously expect your > readers to know that, or were you just trying to appear clever at the > expense of actually communicating? It's also a handy dogwhistle. I'm sure the ADL would take great offence. Explanation in the headers, but treat it as a puzzle and you should be able to work it out pretty quickly, in particular if you already know who the ADL are. Phil -- We are no longer hunters and nomads. No longer awed and frightened, as we have gained some understanding of the world in which we live. As such, we can cast aside childish remnants from the dawn of our civilization. -- NotSanguine on SoylentNews, after Eugen Weber in /The Western Tradition/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-25 00:13 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <6df94312-1b91-438a-9d72-0ab20892438en@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #169028 |
On Wednesday, 25 January 2023 at 09:54:07 UTC+2, Phil Carmody wrote: > Keith Thompson <Keith.S.T...@gmail.com> writes: > > Apparently "octoctal" is an extremely obscure term for an encoding that > > is almost universally called base64. Did you seriously expect your > > readers to know that, or were you just trying to appear clever at the > > expense of actually communicating? > > It's also a handy dogwhistle. I'm sure the ADL would take great > offence. Explanation in the headers, but treat it as a puzzle and > you should be able to work it out pretty quickly, in particular > if you already know who the ADL are. You use acronym of three common letters. At least Wikipedia shows many <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADL> with none relation to software development, JSON, C. IOW ... say again, didn't parse.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-25 20:41 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <877cxajw2z.fsf@zotaspaz.fatphil.org> |
| In reply to | #169030 |
Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> writes: > On Wednesday, 25 January 2023 at 09:54:07 UTC+2, Phil Carmody wrote: >> Keith Thompson <Keith.S.T...@gmail.com> writes: >> > Apparently "octoctal" is an extremely obscure term for an encoding that >> > is almost universally called base64. Did you seriously expect your >> > readers to know that, or were you just trying to appear clever at the >> > expense of actually communicating? >> >> It's also a handy dogwhistle. I'm sure the ADL would take great >> offence. Explanation in the headers, but treat it as a puzzle and >> you should be able to work it out pretty quickly, in particular >> if you already know who the ADL are. > > You use acronym of three common letters. At least Wikipedia shows > many <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADL> with none relation to > software development, JSON, C. IOW ... say again, didn't parse. Why would something about dog-whistles be anything to do with software development, JSON, or C? Have you not noticed that we've veered completely off-topic for the newsgroup? Why didn't you simply follow the directions and look for the explaination in the headers - everything you need is already there? Phil -- We are no longer hunters and nomads. No longer awed and frightened, as we have gained some understanding of the world in which we live. As such, we can cast aside childish remnants from the dawn of our civilization. -- NotSanguine on SoylentNews, after Eugen Weber in /The Western Tradition/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-25 14:08 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <tqrunv$pf5a$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #169043 |
On 1/25/23 13:41, Phil Carmody wrote: > Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> writes: >> On Wednesday, 25 January 2023 at 09:54:07 UTC+2, Phil Carmody wrote: ... >>> It's also a handy dogwhistle. I'm sure the ADL would take great >>> offence. Explanation in the headers, but treat it as a puzzle and >>> you should be able to work it out pretty quickly, in particular if >>> you already know who the ADL are. >> >> You use acronym of three common letters. At least Wikipedia shows >> many <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADL> with none relation to >> software development, JSON, C. IOW ... say again, didn't parse. > > Why would something about dog-whistles be anything to do with > software development, JSON, or C? Have you not noticed that we've > veered completely off-topic for the newsgroup? > > Why didn't you simply follow the directions and look for the > explaination in the headers - everything you need is already > there? I'm a bit confused. He's wondering which ADL you're referring to, and why. So am I. How would examining the headers help answer that question? That abbreviation appears nowhere in the headers that I looked at.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-25 11:35 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <87lelqiezy.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #169047 |
James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
> On 1/25/23 13:41, Phil Carmody wrote:
>> Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> writes:
>>> On Wednesday, 25 January 2023 at 09:54:07 UTC+2, Phil Carmody wrote:
> ...
>>>> It's also a handy dogwhistle. I'm sure the ADL would take great
>>>> offence. Explanation in the headers, but treat it as a puzzle and
>>>> you should be able to work it out pretty quickly, in particular if
>>>> you already know who the ADL are.
>>>
>>> You use acronym of three common letters. At least Wikipedia shows
>>> many <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADL> with none relation to
>>> software development, JSON, C. IOW ... say again, didn't parse.
>>
>> Why would something about dog-whistles be anything to do with
>> software development, JSON, or C? Have you not noticed that we've
>> veered completely off-topic for the newsgroup?
>>
>> Why didn't you simply follow the directions and look for the
>> explaination in the headers - everything you need is already
>> there?
>
> I'm a bit confused. He's wondering which ADL you're referring to, and
> why. So am I. How would examining the headers help answer that question?
> That abbreviation appears nowhere in the headers that I looked at.
Öö is referring to the Anti-Defamation League. He's insinuating that
since the word "octoctal" contains two occurrences of the number 8, it's
anti-semitic ("88" is a common neo-Nazi symbol, for reasons I will not
explain here).
Öö is making an offensive and unfounded accusation for which he should
apologize. (It's possible he intended it as a joke.)
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for XCOM Labs
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-26 00:18 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tqsdcs$rpkn$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #169048 |
On 25/01/2023 20:35, Keith Thompson wrote:
> James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
>> On 1/25/23 13:41, Phil Carmody wrote:
>>> Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> writes:
>>>> On Wednesday, 25 January 2023 at 09:54:07 UTC+2, Phil Carmody wrote:
>> ...
>>>>> It's also a handy dogwhistle. I'm sure the ADL would take great
>>>>> offence. Explanation in the headers, but treat it as a puzzle and
>>>>> you should be able to work it out pretty quickly, in particular if
>>>>> you already know who the ADL are.
>>>>
>>>> You use acronym of three common letters. At least Wikipedia shows
>>>> many <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADL> with none relation to
>>>> software development, JSON, C. IOW ... say again, didn't parse.
>>>
>>> Why would something about dog-whistles be anything to do with
>>> software development, JSON, or C? Have you not noticed that we've
>>> veered completely off-topic for the newsgroup?
>>>
>>> Why didn't you simply follow the directions and look for the
>>> explaination in the headers - everything you need is already
>>> there?
>>
>> I'm a bit confused. He's wondering which ADL you're referring to, and
>> why. So am I. How would examining the headers help answer that question?
>> That abbreviation appears nowhere in the headers that I looked at.
>
> Öö is referring to the Anti-Defamation League. He's insinuating that
> since the word "octoctal" contains two occurrences of the number 8, it's
> anti-semitic ("88" is a common neo-Nazi symbol, for reasons I will not
> explain here).
>
> Öö is making an offensive and unfounded accusation for which he should
> apologize. (It's possible he intended it as a joke.)
>
Now /I/ am confused - did you mean /Phil/ was referring to the
Anti-Defamation League? Öö simply wrote that he couldn't understand
Phil's post.
James, to see Phil's hint in the headers, look at the full headers for
Phil's post (ctrl-U in Thunderbird will give you it). There is an
"X-Spoiler:" header.
I think Phil's insinuations are too far-fetched and obscured to be
particularly offensive - perhaps he was trying to mock the daftest of
conspiracy theorists for some reason. It made as much sense as if he'd
suggested "octoctal" was a reference to two fat ladies.
(I'm guessing Bart will understand that reference, but I'm not sure how
many others will.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-25 15:33 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <87cz72i3zg.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #169056 |
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes:
[...]
> Now /I/ am confused - did you mean /Phil/ was referring to the
> Anti-Defamation League? Öö simply wrote that he couldn't understand
> Phil's post.
Argh! You're absolutely right, and it was careless of me to accuse Öö.
Thank you for catching that.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for XCOM Labs
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-29 01:08 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <87y1pmi7f1.fsf@zotaspaz.fatphil.org> |
| In reply to | #169056 |
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes: > I think Phil's insinuations are too far-fetched and obscured to be > particularly offensive - perhaps he was trying to mock the daftest of > conspiracy theorists for some reason. It made as much sense as if > he'd suggested "octoctal" was a reference to two fat ladies. You get it. And there was no accusation of any individual. I was making a comment about an intrinsic property of a sequence of characters, nothing more. Phil -- We are no longer hunters and nomads. No longer awed and frightened, as we have gained some understanding of the world in which we live. As such, we can cast aside childish remnants from the dawn of our civilization. -- NotSanguine on SoylentNews, after Eugen Weber in /The Western Tradition/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-29 13:53 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <86h6w9f1nt.fsf@linuxsc.com> |
| In reply to | #169089 |
Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> writes: > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes: > >> I think Phil's insinuations are too far-fetched and obscured to be >> particularly offensive - perhaps he was trying to mock the daftest of >> conspiracy theorists for some reason. It made as much sense as if >> he'd suggested "octoctal" was a reference to two fat ladies. > > You get it. > > And there was no accusation of any individual. I was making a comment > about an intrinsic property of a sequence of characters, nothing more. I understand (at least I think I do) the point you're trying to make, and I think the point is an important one to make. However, I feel obliged to point out that the property here is not intrinsic to a sequence of characters, but depends on who the recipients are. It is a question of fact, but the facts depend on who the listeners are as well as on what words are used.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-25 15:31 -0800 |
| Subject | Apology to Öö Tiib (was Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C?) |
| Message-ID | <87h6wei42x.fsf_-_@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #169048 |
Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:
> James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
>> On 1/25/23 13:41, Phil Carmody wrote:
>>> Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> writes:
>>>> On Wednesday, 25 January 2023 at 09:54:07 UTC+2, Phil Carmody wrote:
>> ...
>>>>> It's also a handy dogwhistle. I'm sure the ADL would take great
>>>>> offence. Explanation in the headers, but treat it as a puzzle and
>>>>> you should be able to work it out pretty quickly, in particular if
>>>>> you already know who the ADL are.
>>>>
>>>> You use acronym of three common letters. At least Wikipedia shows
>>>> many <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADL> with none relation to
>>>> software development, JSON, C. IOW ... say again, didn't parse.
>>>
>>> Why would something about dog-whistles be anything to do with
>>> software development, JSON, or C? Have you not noticed that we've
>>> veered completely off-topic for the newsgroup?
>>>
>>> Why didn't you simply follow the directions and look for the
>>> explaination in the headers - everything you need is already
>>> there?
>>
>> I'm a bit confused. He's wondering which ADL you're referring to, and
>> why. So am I. How would examining the headers help answer that question?
>> That abbreviation appears nowhere in the headers that I looked at.
>
> Öö is referring to the Anti-Defamation League. He's insinuating that
> since the word "octoctal" contains two occurrences of the number 8, it's
> anti-semitic ("88" is a common neo-Nazi symbol, for reasons I will not
> explain here).
>
> Öö is making an offensive and unfounded accusation for which he should
> apologize. (It's possible he intended it as a joke.)
Öö Tiib, please accept my sincere apologies. It was Phil Carmody, not
you, who insinuated that "octoctal" is a neo-Nazi dogwhistle. I should
have checked the headers more carefully.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for XCOM Labs
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-25 23:17 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Apology to Öö Tiib (was Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C?) |
| Message-ID | <9fb8ecfe-1666-4a7c-9623-0338c2bb13dcn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #169057 |
On Thursday, 26 January 2023 at 01:31:48 UTC+2, Keith Thompson wrote:
> Keith Thompson <Keith.S.T...@gmail.com> writes:
> > James Kuyper <james...@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
> >> On 1/25/23 13:41, Phil Carmody wrote:
> >>> Öö Tiib <oot...@hot.ee> writes:
> >>>> On Wednesday, 25 January 2023 at 09:54:07 UTC+2, Phil Carmody wrote:
> >> ...
> >>>>> It's also a handy dogwhistle. I'm sure the ADL would take great
> >>>>> offence. Explanation in the headers, but treat it as a puzzle and
> >>>>> you should be able to work it out pretty quickly, in particular if
> >>>>> you already know who the ADL are.
> >>>>
> >>>> You use acronym of three common letters. At least Wikipedia shows
> >>>> many <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADL> with none relation to
> >>>> software development, JSON, C. IOW ... say again, didn't parse.
> >>>
> >>> Why would something about dog-whistles be anything to do with
> >>> software development, JSON, or C? Have you not noticed that we've
> >>> veered completely off-topic for the newsgroup?
> >>>
> >>> Why didn't you simply follow the directions and look for the
> >>> explaination in the headers - everything you need is already
> >>> there?
> >>
> >> I'm a bit confused. He's wondering which ADL you're referring to, and
> >> why. So am I. How would examining the headers help answer that question?
> >> That abbreviation appears nowhere in the headers that I looked at.
> >
> > Öö is referring to the Anti-Defamation League. He's insinuating that
> > since the word "octoctal" contains two occurrences of the number 8, it's
> > anti-semitic ("88" is a common neo-Nazi symbol, for reasons I will not
> > explain here).
> >
> > Öö is making an offensive and unfounded accusation for which he should
> > apologize. (It's possible he intended it as a joke.)
> Öö Tiib, please accept my sincere apologies. It was Phil Carmody, not
> you, who insinuated that "octoctal" is a neo-Nazi dogwhistle. I should
> have checked the headers more carefully.
> --
Oh, no problem. I was just sincerely puzzled what it was about.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-29 13:47 -0800 |
| Subject | A comment about dogwhistles |
| Message-ID | <86lellf1xx.fsf_-_@linuxsc.com> |
| In reply to | #169057 |
Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes: [...] > It was Phil Carmody [...] who insinuated that "octoctal" is a > neo-Nazi dogwhistle. I think it's important to distinguish between saying a particular word is /heard/ by some (or many) people as a dogwhistle, and saying that a given speaker who used the word /intended to give/ a dogwhistle. I don't know what Phil was thinking when he made his comment, but I think we shouldn't assume he meant one of these alternatives when he may have meant only the other.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-03 15:05 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: A comment about dogwhistles |
| Message-ID | <87r0u6kmtb.fsf@zotaspaz.fatphil.org> |
| In reply to | #169111 |
Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes: > Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes: > > [...] > >> It was Phil Carmody [...] who insinuated that "octoctal" is a >> neo-Nazi dogwhistle. > > I think it's important to distinguish between saying a particular > word is /heard/ by some (or many) people as a dogwhistle, and > saying that a given speaker who used the word /intended to give/ > a dogwhistle. > > I don't know what Phil was thinking when he made his comment, but > I think we shouldn't assume he meant one of these alternatives > when he may have meant only the other. Someone walked into the thread carrying an ornate awl he was very proud of. All I said was "nice shiv". Phil -- We are no longer hunters and nomads. No longer awed and frightened, as we have gained some understanding of the world in which we live. As such, we can cast aside childish remnants from the dawn of our civilization. -- NotSanguine on SoylentNews, after Eugen Weber in /The Western Tradition/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-26 15:16 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <20230126151642.38a41ca86152d0ae7a8c6dcf@g{oogle}mail.com> |
| In reply to | #169048 |
Keith Thompson: > "88" is a common neo-Nazi symbol, for reasons I will not > explain here). That explains a video from the surrender of the Mariupol garrison to the Russian troops, where I did not understand the following dialoge between a surrendering Ukrainian and a Russian officer: -- Your smartphone password. -- 1488. -- What, are you a Nazi? -- Not anymore. -- () ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-25 10:37 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <87y1pqihpc.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #169028 |
Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> writes:
> Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:
>> Apparently "octoctal" is an extremely obscure term for an encoding that
>> is almost universally called base64. Did you seriously expect your
>> readers to know that, or were you just trying to appear clever at the
>> expense of actually communicating?
>
> It's also a handy dogwhistle. I'm sure the ADL would take great
> offence. Explanation in the headers, but treat it as a puzzle and
> you should be able to work it out pretty quickly, in particular
> if you already know who the ADL are.
Seriously? That seems like a big stretch and a serious unfounded
accusation.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for XCOM Labs
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-29 20:57 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1bo7qgd68h.fsf@pfeifferfamily.net> |
| In reply to | #169028 |
Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> writes: > Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes: >> Apparently "octoctal" is an extremely obscure term for an encoding that >> is almost universally called base64. Did you seriously expect your >> readers to know that, or were you just trying to appear clever at the >> expense of actually communicating? > > It's also a handy dogwhistle. I'm sure the ADL would take great > offence. Explanation in the headers, but treat it as a puzzle and > you should be able to work it out pretty quickly, in particular > if you already know who the ADL are. Have you read what the ADL has to say about the actual number 88 and non-white supremacist contexts? You're mistaking tinnitis for the sound of a dog whistle.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-29 23:04 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <tr7j5e$35d0h$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #169130 |
On 1/29/2023 9:57 PM, Joe Pfeiffer wrote: > Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> writes: > >> Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes: >>> Apparently "octoctal" is an extremely obscure term for an encoding that >>> is almost universally called base64. Did you seriously expect your >>> readers to know that, or were you just trying to appear clever at the >>> expense of actually communicating? >> >> It's also a handy dogwhistle. I'm sure the ADL would take great >> offence. Explanation in the headers, but treat it as a puzzle and >> you should be able to work it out pretty quickly, in particular >> if you already know who the ADL are. > > Have you read what the ADL has to say about the actual number 88 and > non-white supremacist contexts? You're mistaking tinnitis for the sound > of a dog whistle. Interestingly, I had not heard of this usage until it came up in this thread... But, yeah, numbers like this can come up in lots of other contexts purely by chance. Well, and sometimes there is also the possibly fuzzy line between what is antisemitism, and what is self-deprecating humor, ... In some sense, context would need to be considered as well to try to determine the intended effect. But, there is always also the possibility of people taking offense at things that were not intended to cause offense. Well, just as there is the possibility of those with hostile intentions trying to downplay it as an "innocent joke". And, for someone whose status is more ambiguous, it can be awkward as well (both in terms of concern of hostility from those who dislike the group, and the paranoia that things they say could be taken as offensive by those who view them as an outsider, so alas...).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-22 21:09 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <tql4pt$3g350$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #168906 |
On 1/22/2023 5:03 PM, Öö Tiib wrote: > On Monday, 23 January 2023 at 02:48:47 UTC+2, Simon.S...@gfdedsed.hgtgfrfd wrote: >> On 22/01/2023 23:35, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >>> On 2023-01-22, Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluema...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) >>>> --------------3JQTljwVhFWpzoRzV8egebvc >>>> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------0MNTGzMBPlMoL8j1kNzL9HTB"; >>>> protected-headers="v1" >>>> From: Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluema...@gmail.com> >>>> Newsgroups: comp.lang.c >>>> Subject: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? >>>> >>>> --------------0MNTGzMBPlMoL8j1kNzL9HTB >>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed >>>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 >>>> >>>> DQrigItJIG5lZWQgYSBKU09OIGxpYnJhcnkgdGhhdCBhbGxvd3MgbWUgdG8gcmVhZCBkaXJl >>>> Y3RseSBmcm9tIGEgSlNPTiBmaWxlLiANCiAgSSBkb24ndCB3YW50IHRvIGhhdmUgdG8gY29w >>> Would you be able to stop posting MIME stuff? Thanks. >> He can't because he is using a silly signature with funny characters and >> so the server he is using (Eternal-September) is converting everything >> to base64. He could try using this and it will work: >> >>> news://news.aioe.org/comp.lang.c >> >>> news://paganini.bofh.team/comp.lang.c >> >> >>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 >> >> There is no need to have pgp file attachment because the posts here are >> for everybody to read in any news client. I have never understood the >> benefit of PGP encryption for newsgroups. They are supposed to be open >> and for people to read and respond normally. Is C programming secretive >> and closed shop? I doubt it!!! > > The point of signature is not to encrypt something but to make it harder > for someone else to post fake messages "from you" ... or to write a bot > that posts those ... and so on. > > Like posting a hash of the message, sender, ect...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-23 02:41 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <87a62aug4e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #168904 |
Simon.Says.Yes@gfdedsed.hgtgfrfd writes: > On 22/01/2023 23:35, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >> On 2023-01-22, Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> wrote: >>> This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) >>> --------------3JQTljwVhFWpzoRzV8egebvc >>> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------0MNTGzMBPlMoL8j1kNzL9HTB"; >>> protected-headers="v1" >>> From: Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> >>> Newsgroups: comp.lang.c >>> Subject: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? >>> >>> --------------0MNTGzMBPlMoL8j1kNzL9HTB >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed >>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 >>> >>> DQrigItJIG5lZWQgYSBKU09OIGxpYnJhcnkgdGhhdCBhbGxvd3MgbWUgdG8gcmVhZCBkaXJl >>> Y3RseSBmcm9tIGEgSlNPTiBmaWxlLiANCiAgSSBkb24ndCB3YW50IHRvIGhhdmUgdG8gY29w >> Would you be able to stop posting MIME stuff? Thanks. > > He can't because he is using a silly signature with funny characters and > so the server he is using (Eternal-September) is converting everything > to base64. No, the server is not converting anything, and the signature only contains "funny characters" in the sense that it's binary data. The body of the post is also base64 encoded and could use any UTF-8 encoded characters but in fact it only uses plain ASCII. > He could try using this and it will work: > >> news://news.aioe.org/comp.lang.c > >> news://paganini.bofh.team/comp.lang.c If both operate correctly they should pass on the multi-part posting that his or her news client (thuderbird) has prepared. Any encoding should be done only in the client. >> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 > > There is no need to have pgp file attachment because the posts here are > for everybody to read in any news client. I have never understood the > benefit of PGP encryption for newsgroups. The post is signed, not encrypted, and so it is available for everyone to read (if they have software that can display it at all). Signing would prevent someone from spoofing posts. I'm not sue it's worth the trouble, though my client software has no trouble with it. -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web