TurboWarp
Add new extension: NGL anonymous message sender extension
This is a extension which allows you to send a message through anybody over NGL's API. Enjoy!
What is the NGL API?
It is a anonymous messaging service at https://ngl.link
It is a anonymous messaging service at
Ah, I see. It looks very cool, although I don't understand it)))
@CubesterYT @SharkPool-SP @GarboMuffin Do any of you know why validation failed? I can't figure out what's wrong with the extension.
@CubesterYT @SharkPool-SP @GarboMuffin Do any of you know why validation failed? I can't figure out what's wrong with the extension.
It said something was wrong with validating the URL pointing to localhost, nothing to worry about since i had to locally test it on my machine
@CubesterYT @SharkPool-SP @GarboMuffin Do any of you know why validation failed? I can't figure out what's wrong with the extension.
The sample project references localhost instead of extensions.turbowarp.org, so when it's merged it will fail... it's something that can be corrected fairly easily.
Also, this extension likely won't be merged since from what I can tell by a quick skim it references an external domain and allows users to communicate with each other. Big security/privacy no-no, and even if I'm wrong accessing an external domain isn't future-compatible if it ever goes down
Also, this extension likely won't be merged since from what I can tell by a quick skim it references an external domain and allows users to communicate with each other. Big security/privacy no-no, and even if I'm wrong accessing an external domain isn't future-compatible if it ever goes down
I don't agree with any of these points. TurboWarp should not try to suppress communication. I still wouldn't advocate for it though, because this seems like centralized communication that could be arbitrarily censored.
I would close this. It's not about suppressing communication, it's about future compatibility and security for our users. We can't have unmoderated communication for obvious reasons (notably child safety, security, other malicious reasons, etc.), the domain or external server could fail at any given moment, the domain could be inaccessible on a whitelisted network, and a slew of other reasons. It's been a hard ground rule in the past that TW not rely on external dependencies, so that automatically rules this out, and when combined with uncensored communication, I'd say probably close to 0 chance of being merged.
@CubesterYT correct me if I'm wrong I don't want to make any mistakes or cause extra problems here
okay just wanna make sure I wasn't closing something I shouldn't have
I would close this. It's not about suppressing communication, it's about future compatibility and security for our users. We can't have unmoderated communication for obvious reasons (notably child safety, security, other malicious reasons, etc.), the domain or external server could fail at any given moment, the domain could be inaccessible on a whitelisted network, and a slew of other reasons. It's been a hard ground rule in the past that TW not rely on external dependencies, so that automatically rules this out, and when combined with uncensored communication, I'd say probably close to 0 chance of being merged.
I don't want to be enemies with you, but "child safety" and "security" are no excuse for limiting freedom of speech. If we educate users to use pseudonyms, never reveal personal info, and stop chatting if they feel endangered or offended, we shouldn't need censorship.
I would close this. It's not about suppressing communication, it's about future compatibility and security for our users. We can't have unmoderated communication for obvious reasons (notably child safety, security, other malicious reasons, etc.), the domain or external server could fail at any given moment, the domain could be inaccessible on a whitelisted network, and a slew of other reasons. It's been a hard ground rule in the past that TW not rely on external dependencies, so that automatically rules this out, and when combined with uncensored communication, I'd say probably close to 0 chance of being merged.
I don't want to be enemies with you, but "child safety" and "security" are no excuse for limiting freedom of speech. If we educate users to use pseudonyms, never reveal personal info, and stop chatting if they feel endangered or offended, we shouldn't need censorship.
Neither do I want enmity. I believe in free speech and peaceful civil discourse. I don't mind having a formal argument with you, but I don't want to make it verbal quarreling.
Here's my perspective: Sure, free speech. Sure, let people have an extension that lets them communicate. But I will NOT under ANY circumstances merge something that would allow a mentally ill or immoral adult have uncensored communication with innocent children (I hope you're reading between the lines of what I'm trying to say...) Also, "Educating users" doesn't mean nobody will break the "rules" if they have the ability to (which this extension provides). Most parents don't want their 10-year-olds exposed to something that would make a movie PG-13 or R rated (e.g, explicit language or sexual content)
It provides security and safety concerns, it's not about limiting freedom of speech, it's about protecting individuals. If it were censored, moderated, or relied on private, password-protected chatrooms between individuals that trust each other, that would be different, but this allows untethered access for anonymous communication between anybody. It's an absolute no-no, not gonna happen. If people want free communication then just go DM them on discord or insta or something like that
also it wouldn't be logistically possible (or, if not impossible, not recommended) to integrate with turbowarp's capabilities anyways so if you don't agree with the above argument then that's fine, I understand your perspective, but it's still not getting merged.
TL;DR
we're not suppressing communication or opposed to free speech, I'm simply trying to do what's best for all of our users.
@Brackets-Coder I would not call that mental illness; it does not incapacitate the afflicted but instead induces urges that may result in harm to others. I will point out that this medium is also both censored and moderated, almost to an absurd extent.
@GarboMuffin Would you please lock this before I start a flame war?
@Brackets-Coder I would not call that mental illness; it does not incapacitate the afflicted but instead induces urges that may result in harm to others. I will point out that this medium is also both censored and moderated, almost to an absurd extent.
@GarboMuffin Would you please lock this before I start a flame war?
Sure, let's not argue anymore, for your sake and mine. I don't want to fight with anybody and you said you didn't either. wish granted.
@PPPDUD I hope you understand my perspective as I understand yours. Both arguments have their pros and cons and it's outside the scope of what can be discussed here. My job is to speak the truth with loving kindness, not to create bitterness between people. If I've done what I was trying to avoid, I entirely and sincerely apologize
@PPPDUD I hope you understand my perspective as I understand yours. Both arguments have their pros and cons and it's outside the scope of what can be discussed here. My job is to speak the truth with loving kindness, not to create bitterness between people. If I've done what I was trying to avoid, I entirely and sincerely apologize
You're fine.
@PPPDUD I hope you understand my perspective as I understand yours. Both arguments have their pros and cons and it's outside the scope of what can be discussed here. My job is to speak the truth with loving kindness, not to create bitterness between people. If I've done what I was trying to avoid, I entirely and sincerely apologize
You're fine.
Okay just wanted to clarify and make everything right