[ why i do not like base64]

[Ian Malone]

On 20 January 2012 19:48, g <geleem at bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> On 01/20/2012 10:48 AM, Ian Malone wrote:
> <>
>
>> Don't know why you conclude that, spam links can have a short lifetime
>> as they get shut down.
> -=-
>
> i must be smoking something stronger than you. B=D
>
> i do not recall, nor see where i made such statement, or imply.
>

I was referring to this, which my mail client says you sent, apologies
if you did not:
"firefox displayed a "404". i broke link."
Only picked up on it as I wasn't really sure what was meant.

>
>> FWIW I do agree base64 is an unfriendly way to send email text bodies.
> -=-
>
> supposed reasoning is base64 compresses.
>

Base64 expands (necessarily since it tries to represent full octets
with a subset), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base64#MIME there isn't
much of a rationale for using it in email text (though encoding is
required for binary attachments), its main purpose seems to be
obfuscating the text to make it harder to scan.

-- 
imalone