On Oct 30, 2014, at 12:32 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:

>Sure, and they're convenient mostly because you're used to them.  They
>really don't have more content than SHA1s do, but they're easier to
>read because they're decimal and relatively small.  I'm not going to
>deny that, but I think everybody would be better off if some
>infrastructure were created to make SHA1s easier to manipulate.

That's the point I'm really trying to make; SHAs are simply terrible to
communicate between humans.

Cheers,
-Barry