3 ms·
8 bit ascii could work. 8^256 is a huge number.
by nickthemagicman 6y ago
8 bit ascii could work.
8^256 is a huge number.
- thechao 6y agoI can’t even this math.
- nickthemagicman 6y agoI worded wrong.
- colejohnson66 6y agoA 256 bit number is 2^256 possible combinations. 8^256 is the same as (2^3)^256 (or 2^768)
- nickthemagicman 6y agoEr yeah. Derp. 8 character ascii not 8 bit. It's early. That's 8 bits ^ 8. Or 256 ^ 8. and easily able to be represented searching online with 8 characters.
- SiVal 6y agoDon't get discouraged, but you might still have a bug or two to work out with your new and never-before-tried "256^8 and easily able to be represented searching online with 8 characters" design. For your beta test, here are some of the unique 8-char identifiers you might want to try searching for: `unique `, ` unique `, ` unique`, `Unique `, `u^Hunique`, `un^Hnique`, `uniq^H^H^H^H`, ` . . . .`, `. . . . `, `uniqueESCESC`, `BELBELBELBELBELBELBELBEL`, ...
- nickthemagicman 6y agoLol, thanks for your totally non sarcastic assistance. It needs some fleshing out.
- nickthemagicman 6y agoIf the alternative is a 32 char, 128 bit hex string..I think that's a little excessive to expect people to use especially when an 8 char ascii has way more variation and is way easier to remember. 687c066db3458f7cbd5cc8bd58a65c64. Vs. *Xrh6x1! You just have to eliminate dictionary words.