captain_aggravated comments on Artemis astronaut shares video of Earth 🌍 setting on the Moon 🌕

[–] captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 months ago (4 children)

Than an entire word?

Take "cactus" for example. Each letter in the word "cactus" is one unicode character, for a total of six. 🌵 is one unicode character, U+1F335.

Unicode characters are 4 bytes long, so "cactus" takes 24 bytes to transmit, where "🌵" takes 4. Unless something something UTF_8?

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] onlyhalfminotaur@lemmy.world 1 point 6 months ago* (1 child)

You're close, Unicode characters don't imply a number of bytes, it's how they're encoded that does (utf-8 most commonly). Utf-8 can be as little as one byte or as many as four, depending on the specific character. I don't know about emojis but I imagine they're in the four bytes section. Whereas "asdf" is also four bytes in utf-8.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 months ago

So I just looked it up, the UTF-8 encoding for the cactus emoji is 4 bytes long: 0xF0 0x9F 0x8C 0xB5

Where the Latin alphabet is in the 1-byte region.

So it takes 6 bytes to transmit "cactus" in UTF-8, and only 4 to transmit “🌵”. So any emoji that replaces 5 or more letters is more efficient. 🍆 breaks even with "dick" or "cock", more efficient than "penis", more than twice as compact as "eggplant" or "aubergine".

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

But that's not what people are doing

They always use a word and an emoji

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 1 point 6 months ago

Yes, to be clear I meant the example I gave where the word was replaced with the emoji was compression, not where they give the word and its emoji. That's as long-handed as possible.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent