Author Topic: robohash discrepancies  (Read 3517 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline lovejoy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 431
    • View Profile
    • Cryptofresh
  • BitShares: lovejoy
Thanks to the crack BTS detective team for getting to the bottom of this and pushing updates / clearing confusion. Especially happy it wasn't just me! :)

I agree there are perhaps better solutions, but for now we're on the Robohash / SafeBot tip, so good to keep it working as intended.

Offline svk

I've pushed an update to Bitsharesblocks that should keep the robots consistent with the wallet. As graffenwalder noted, there's definitely an issue with the ?size param, there appears to be at least two different robots generated depending on the size you use, so for anyone looking to use this, be careful with the size!
Worker: dev.bitsharesblocks

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4570
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
This could just be an issue with the wallet sending an incorrect string to robohash.org. My robot still matches but I haven't checked in the wallet. How about the robots on bitsharesblocks?
Nop .. My avatar is a link to robohash that hasn't changed for weeks .. though the image changed .. it's definitely on the robohash.org side

Looks like they changed the hashes for set_1 then, I'm pretty sure they used to be the same as the standard one because the robots on bitsharesblocks were the same as the ones in the wallet.
This looks same to my original robot: http://robohash.org/set_4/a.delegate.abit
BitShares committee member: abit
BitShares witness: in.abit

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4570
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
This could just be an issue with the wallet sending an incorrect string to robohash.org. My robot still matches but I haven't checked in the wallet. How about the robots on bitsharesblocks?
Nop .. My avatar is a link to robohash that hasn't changed for weeks .. though the image changed .. it's definitely on the robohash.org side
Your new avatar looks strange.  ???
BitShares committee member: abit
BitShares witness: in.abit

Offline valzav

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 294
    • View Profile
yes, it looks like robohash.org has changed something on its side

Offline graffenwalder

Something strange going on now.
My profile pic is linked to robohash. But if you keep refreshing the page, it changes from the old to the new avatar, back and forth.

It only happens with the 150x150
http://robohash.org/set_1/graffenwalder?size=150x150
The 40x40 seems to stay the same
http://robohash.org/set_1/graffenwalder?size=40x40

Offline svk

This could just be an issue with the wallet sending an incorrect string to robohash.org. My robot still matches but I haven't checked in the wallet. How about the robots on bitsharesblocks?
Nop .. My avatar is a link to robohash that hasn't changed for weeks .. though the image changed .. it's definitely on the robohash.org side

Looks like they changed the hashes for set_1 then, I'm pretty sure they used to be the same as the standard one because the robots on bitsharesblocks were the same as the ones in the wallet.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2015, 01:39:22 pm by svk »
Worker: dev.bitsharesblocks

Offline svk

Think I found the issue on the bitsharesblocks end, I'm fetching http://robohash.org/dev.bitsharesblocks.png, I need to remove the .png and add /set_1/
Worker: dev.bitsharesblocks

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12920
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
This could just be an issue with the wallet sending an incorrect string to robohash.org. My robot still matches but I haven't checked in the wallet. How about the robots on bitsharesblocks?
Nop .. My avatar is a link to robohash that hasn't changed for weeks .. though the image changed .. it's definitely on the robohash.org side

Offline svk

This could just be an issue with the wallet sending an incorrect string to robohash.org. My robot still matches but I haven't checked in the wallet. How about the robots on bitsharesblocks?

Just noticed the OP includes bitsharesblocks. Strange, I'll look into this some more once I get home. The wallet btw uses: http://robohash.org/set_1/robot_name while I believe I'm just using http://robohash.org/robot_name.

If you check http://robohash.org/set_1/media.bitscape it's the same one that's in the wallet.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2015, 01:30:54 pm by svk »
Worker: dev.bitsharesblocks

Offline liondani

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3737
  • Inch by inch, play by play
    • View Profile
    • My detailed info
  • BitShares: liondani
  • GitHub: liondani
same problems with my wallet,  I have new robots faces now,  what a mess  >:(

Sent from my ALCATEL ONE TOUCH 997D


Offline graffenwalder

Should a ticket be made at bter, to change their avatar on the deposit page?

Or should we wait until we find a solution to the changing avatar problem?

Edit:

Just made a ticket to give them a heads up
« Last Edit: January 27, 2015, 11:19:58 am by graffenwalder »

Offline arhag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1214
    • View Profile
    • My posts on Steem
  • BitShares: arhag
  • GitHub: arhag
A 3 digit checksum is far more practical for that purpose.
let's use a RS-code instead that allows to fix up to 2 typos per account name

Checkout NXT, they are doing it that way

Sure, whatever, sounds good. The point is that communicating your natural language compatible account name should be something rare. It should be reserved for exchanging contact info between people in person who don't have their smartphones handy (or don't want to bother to use it), or for people broadcasting their account name (similar to how people might announce their Twitter handle) over mediums in which some acceptable level of biometric authentication (voice and/or face) is possible, such as TV, radio, audio/video podcasts, etc. It shouldn't be used for any other situation.

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12920
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
A 3 digit checksum is far more practical for that purpose.
let's use a RS-code instead that allows to fix up to 2 typos per account name

Checkout NXT, they are doing it that way

Offline arhag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1214
    • View Profile
    • My posts on Steem
  • BitShares: arhag
  • GitHub: arhag
Aghhh, why are we still using robohash / SafeBots?

You should either make transactions with people explicitly added into your contacts / address book OR transactions with important information like the recipient (and perhaps memo) automatically filled out by clicking on a link on your computer.

The only time you should need to manually be absolutely sure you are dealing with the correct account name is when adding the contact to your address book and giving it an alias. And that is only when you can't have the contact addition be automatically done for you with mobile-to-mobile communication, meaning in situations when someone verbally told you their account name. And in situations where you verbally communicate your account name, are you really going to describe your SafeBot? A 3 digit checksum is far more practical for that purpose.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2015, 07:30:10 am by arhag »