119
Capital i and lowercase L look the same in pretty much any sans-serif computer font (sh.itjust.works)
submitted 10 months ago by to c/mildlyinfuriating@lemmy.world
29 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I l

l I

Guess which one is which?

I don't really care about 1, because it's usually different, and I can't be arsed to change the font.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -1 points 10 months ago (1 child)

Mother fuckers just base 58 that shit.

I'm assuming that this is the point you're making, but just to clarify:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base32

The most widely used[citation needed] base32 alphabet is defined in RFC 4648 §6 and the earlier RFC 3548 (2003). The scheme was originally designed in 2000 by John Myers for SASL/GSSAPI.[2] It uses an alphabet of A–Z, followed by 2–7. The digits 0, 1 and 8 are skipped due to their similarity with the letters O, I and B (thus "2" has a decimal value of 26).

This is generally considered to be a preferable encoding for things like this.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 8 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

    Yeah... No

    I didn’t mean RFC Base32.

    I meant human-safe alphabets.

    Base58 or Crockford Base32 that intentionally remove I, L, O, and 1 (which is distinct from "base 32").

    RFC Base32 still hits the exact problem I’m ranting about.

    To be clear the (vanilla) base32 version of the aforementioned string:

    "I dont fucking know lots of lllllIIIIIIlllIII etc"

    Outputs:

    "JEQGI33OOQQGM5LDNNUW4ZZANNXG65ZANRXXI4ZAN5TCA3DMNRWGYSKJJFEUSSLMNRWESSKJEBSXIYY="

    You can use cyberchef to check for yourself.

    This does not solve the problem.

    I meant what I'd said: base 58.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent