Finally I propose that we increase the Twt Hash length from 7 to 12 and use the first 12 characters of the base32 encoded blake2b hash. This will solve two problems, the fact that all hashes today either end in q or a (oops) 😅 And increasing the Twt Hash size will ensure that we never run into the chance of collision for ions to come. Chances of a 50% collision with 64 bits / 12 characters is roughly ~12.44B Twts. That ought to be enough! -- I also propose that we modify all our clients and make this change from the 1st July 2025, which will be Yarn.social's 5th birthday and 5 years since I started this whole project and endeavour! 😱 #Twtxt #Update

@prologic pinging the involved (@andros, @abucci, @eapl.me, @lyse, @movq, @sorenpeter), just in case. I might have forgotten someone, please feel free to ping them.

We have 4 clients but this should be 6 I believe with tt2 from @lyse and Twtxtory from @javivf?

I will be adding the code in for yarnd very soon™ for this change, with a if the date is >= 2025-07-01 then compute_new_hashes else compute_old_hashes

@lyse Yup! Will do 🤗

https://git.mills.io/yarnsocial/twtxt.dev/pulls/28

@prologic 🚀🚀🚀🎉🎉🎉

July 1st. 63 days from now to implement a backward-incompatible change, apparently not open to other ideas like replacing blake with SHA, or discussing implementation challenges for other languages and platforms. Finally just closing #18, #19 and #20 without starting a proper discussion and ignoring a 'micro consensus' feels... not right.

I don't know what to think rather than letting it rest (May will be busy here) and focus on other stuff in the future.

twt-hash-v2.md#implementation-timeline

@eapl.me I honestly believe you are overreacting here a little bit 🤣 I completely emphasize with you, it can be pretty tough to feel part of a community at times and run a project with a kind of "democracy" or "vote by committee". But one thing that life has taught me about open source projects and especially decentralised ecosystems is that this doesn't really work.

It isn't that I've not considered all the other options on the table (which can still be), it's just that I've made a decision as the project lead that largely helped trigger a rebirth of the use of Twtxt back in July 1 2020. There are good reasons not to change the threading model right now, as the changes being proposed are quite disruptive and don't consider all the possible things that could go wrong.

I also fundamentally do not believe in the notion that Twtxt should be readable and writable by humans. We've thrown this "argument" around in support of some of the proposals, and I just don't buy it (sorry). As an analogy, nobody writes Email by hand and transmits them to mail servers vai SMTP by hand. We use tools to do this. Twtxt/Yarn should be the same IMO.

I'm with @andros and @eapl.me on this one. But I have also lost interest in twtxt lately and currently rethinking what digital tools truly add value to my life. So I will not spending my time on adding more complexity to Timeline. Still a big thanks to you @prologic for all the great work you have done and all the nice conversations both here and on our video calls.

@sorenpeter You're welcome 🤗 We'll run into each other again. I'm sure! 🤞

@movq I didn't say I was leaving, just not that active here atm. I might be more active on mastodon at https://norrebro.space/@sorenpeter but I'm also rethinking that too tbh.

just for the record I didn't say I was leaving the twtxt 'community' (did I?) but than I have other priorities to focus on in the following months. Please don't be condescending, is not cool.

Development of Timeline (PHP client) has been stale for some reasons, a few of them in my side, so I think it won't be updated to the new thread model, at least pretty soon. So is not that I'll stop using twtxt, just the client I use won't be compatible with the new model in July.

that said, and reading to @sorenpeter and @andros I have new thoughts. I assume that this won't change anyone's opinions or priorities, so it makes no harm sharing them.

It's always tempting to use something that already exists (like X, Masto, Bsky, etc.) rather that building anything through effort and disagreement until reaching to something useful and valuable together. A 'social service' is only useful if people is using it.

I'll add that I haven't lost interest on the 'hacky' part of twtxt about developing tools, protocols, and extensions as a community. It's the appealing part! It's a nice hobby to have, shared with random people across the world. But this is not the right way for me, and makes me feel that I'm unwelcome to propose something different (after watching replies to my previous twt). Feels like "If you don't agree, you are free to leave, we'll miss you." Naah, not cool. I've lived that many times before, and nowadays I don't have enough spare time and energy for a hobby like that.

Let's see what happens next with the micro-community!