I'll see how to integrate such a feature in SimpleKV so that it keeps being simple. I like the idea a lot, thanks!

Thanks for your feedback! I see input sanitation as a double-edged sword: it could potentially prevent some misuse of the service (since it's 100% anonymous), but then ultimately you're the "owner" of your keys (though they're in reality public) and you should be able to write whatever you want in them.

I guess this argument could also be applied to Pastebin? Should it be returning raw HTML if asked to?

The "Content-Type" HTTP header is "text/html; charset=utf-8", you could make it "text/plain; charset=utf-8" to prevent HTML from being parsed.

That makes total sense, cheers!

Thank you for your feedback! For now, I wanted to gauge interest and/or traction in such a service. I will definitely add a Donate button in it once the backend starts to max out the VPS where it lives.

As for the backend, it's a Flask-based API. I'll look into your suggestion though!

Thanks! My use case was very specific, but the concept is so simple I was wondering what people would do with it.

Be careful. These things tend to morph, mutate and become turing-complete. If it grows an emacs step back quietly and slowly. Just remember to feed it plenty of parentheses and you'll be fine.

I'll open source it in the coming weeks. Feel free to e-mail me: simplekv at protonmail dot com

Yup, I have to admit I do this myself. A good amount of things in my household have been acquired like this.

I'm on a few WeChat groups where the reps of different manufacturing firms constantly upload pictures of the newest products they sell on Amazon. For a 5 star review, I'll get a full refund either via Paypal or WeChat Pay.

The message that would trascend from such an action is that our vision of how a society should work was no better than the one in China. The West always believed their ideals and principles around "democracy" and "freedom" were superior to those of the CCP.

Now the West also needs to ban <X> (in this case, a social media platform) to function and is no better than its rival. If anything, this would prove the CCP was always right when it applied such measures in the past.

This sets a scary -albeit interesting- precedent.

> If anything, this would prove the CCP was always right when it applied such measures in the past.

It does no such thing. China was given market access under the precise promise of the Chinese would likewise open their own markets. They did not do that. Then they explicitly started banning American companies, conducting unfair trade practices, and more. All we're seeing now is a long await readjustment to reciprocity. Your logic is bizarre. If two parties were in a Mexican stand off, and both agreed to put down their guns only for one to not actually put them down, then the other party that put their gun down can pick it back up just fine. That other party IS better than it's rival because it acted in good faith, and it was it's rival who was deceitful.

Bigger than the reciprocity problem is that TikTok is operating under Chinese law and thus its American userbase's social media exposure, or a part thereof, is controlled by the CCP.

Not good idea.