#dev 2026-05-16

2026-05-16 UTC
cotsuka, troojg, grufwub and dustinm` joined the channel
#
[angelique]
Some random & dev crossover: If your repo's README includes images, do you place them in a directory and, if so, what do you name it? Just keeping them in the root feels weird, especially when there's more than the one. 🤷‍♀️
k3can joined the channel
cotsuka joined the channel
#
[tantek]
images or img for short perhaps
vidak and cotsuka joined the channel
#
parnikkapore_x
yeah, I've seen people put images for READMEs in an images folder
cotsuka joined the channel
#
[capjamesg]
I have done that too.
#
[capjamesg]
If I only need to include one image I will put it in the repo’s home directory.
doesnm_, M2, blacklight, vidak, jonnybarnes, deathcomestotime, barnaby, cotsuka, TwinAdam, Daijo, ax562, troojg and vriska joined the channel
#
aaronpk
i was excited for a minute that i got webmention spam, but it was actually just a spam micro.blog account responding to a post of mine
proofreed, cotsuka, [artlung], JadedBlueEyes, saccharin, pfych, barnaby and troojg joined the channel
#
jak2k
Indielogin.com can't log me in because it uses a user agent that is also used by LLM crawlers. (There is an open issue.) Even with a correct user agent, I would have to trust the header. Maybe we could specify a way to say "Hey, I'm a bot for <URL>" so it can be verified. Basically an IndieAuth for computers.
#
[tantek]
Really? I'd be surprised if IndieLogin didn't have a unique user agent and even more surprised that any LLMbot would bother with pretending to be IndieLogin
cotsuka joined the channel
#
aaronpk
"Guzzle/3.8.1 curl/7.81.0 PHP/7.4.33"
#
aaronpk
this is what web-bot-auth is for
#
aaronpk
definitely a hot topic right now
cotsuka and ax562 joined the channel
#
[tantek]
Been wondering if IndieAuth / RelMeAuth / Web Signin should suggest a user agent, and similarly for Webmention retrieval requests. That way you could add them to a low frequency allowlist and then it would be obvious if they're legit requests or a dumb bot pounding
runawaydevil joined the channel
#
jak2k
Maybe a service could publish some kind of key it signs a header with? That would be cryptographically verifiable without having to use more complex stuff like client certificates.
deathcomestotime and [pcarrier] joined the channel
#
[pcarrier]
that's what cloudflare reinvented
cotsuka and rrix joined the channel
#
jak2k
Cloudflares solution looks a bit complicated…
#
aaronpk
I was going to say yea that's what web-bot-auth is
#
aaronpk
There's a clear path to do a possibly simpler version of it by indielogin.com publishing a public key in the client ID metadata document, then adding a private key jwt in a header
WinnerWi- joined the channel
#
[tantek]
Still seems like way too much complexity when a simple frequency check between human usage vs bot usage would suffice
#
[tantek]
For this usecase there's no need for 100% verifiable identity plumbing. It just has to be probabilistically true enough for performance reasons
#
[tantek]
No need for PKI or JWT TBH
#
aaronpk
Yeah, but ultimately it should be doing that anyway when it starts the OAuth flow, so it basically rides along for free at least on the client side
#
[tantek]
Nah, OAuth flow is not part of RelMeAuth or Webmention verification so that would needlessly complicate those two usecases
#
[tantek]
My proposal solves all three with less work. Why insist on all the crypto complexity overhead upfront?
#
[tantek]
Also, my proposal would generalize to any server to server follow-your-nose discovery use-cases so it would be a useful building block for future protocols too
#
[tantek]
We should be lowering the batteries to such usecases to provide ever more practical and robust alternatives to all the .well-known fragile site path specific approaches people leap to because they don't know better
#
Loqi
it is probable
#
[tantek]
lowering the barriers* not batteries lol autocorrect that was actually funny 😆
barnaby, cotsuka, barnabywalters and blacklight joined the channel