143500+ entries in 0.086s
mircea_popescu: And in
this here FFa post we will be
taking Comba Mult version x from y date and
together with last week's X, Y and Z, and make
this pile
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform if
that's your node level you are well advised
to make posts for
them rather
than for
the combo.
trinque: no guarantee
the linker *wants*
to link your latest
trinque: eh, easier
to just preserve revisions, and let people link
to a particular one
trinque: thing'd have
to know
the code's AS
trinque: asciilifeform: reintroducing structure atop
the browser's dom isn't sensible, see: semantic web
mircea_popescu: (and no, even if it may seem comfortable,
the confusion is antiproductive)
mircea_popescu: if you have a problem with confusing phase 2 and phase 3,
this blogposting is exactly
the pill required
to resolve it.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform it is! it is EVERYONES! idea of readable.
there's no other fucking readable.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform i
think it is
the right
thing, minus
that she should prolly change
that Recent Posts divbox
to float right with
the content rather
than be fixed. but
this is a one byte fix
mircea_popescu: there's no intention for blogposts
to be liquidshit. once published
they stay ; you want
to change post another one.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform so if you are,
then what she does is correct (minus
that overlaid in
the way right bar). consider a line like if (!from || from->stackCount < quantity) { OutputMsg(csString("Not enough ingredients for bundling! Bot stopping.")); Error(); return false; } else { worldHandler::MoveItems(from->containerID, from->slot,
toContainer, nextEmptySlot, quantity);
mircea_popescu: so you want a) arbitrary long lines on b) arbitrary narrow display in c) fixed point
that nevertheless d) do not
truncate ?
mircea_popescu: imo
this is
the correct usage of html, make
the code line as long as it needs.
mircea_popescu: (can
trivially set
theme
to overflow right, ~like her does)
mircea_popescu: consioder
that for i in {1934360vii..1..12viii}; do usrix= << you can't fucking beat adnotated codelines jesus god.
trinque: asciilifeform: white-space: nowrap (css) on a pre
tag oughta do
that
mircea_popescu: but
this aside : adding
the code as
text files, linked from
the post is perfecty acceptable.
mircea_popescu: in preference of 1. a paste,forumdiscussion
tuple ; 2. a github/medium/slockit/livejournal/slideshare/oglaf drawing etc ; 3. any other
thing.
mircea_popescu: now, 4 can flow
to 1 as it can flow back
to 3, and 3 can flow
to 1 as it can flow
to 4 and so on and so forth. but
the important point re
these four phases is
that
they must be explicitly followed, for great personal as well as republic-wide gains of productivity and GDP.
mircea_popescu: phase 4, when you are done writing code for A WHILE. it doesn't mean
the code's good or bad, it means you personally will be doing other
things. in
this interval
typically people discuss your 3 and stuff happens outside of your hands.
mircea_popescu: phase 3, when you are done writing code FOR NOW.
this is
traditionally
the "refactor break".
this is also when you publish, explaining other
than
the code what you did and why, in detail.
this included "i
tested so and so -- i didn't
test so and so" as it includes "i asume so and so". countrary
to patently false subjective intution,
this is
the MOST valuabler of all
the phases.
mircea_popescu: phase 2, when you write code.
this is
the excited state, "fuck
this shit ima bang something out". it's like prototyping, not even clear whether something comes of it after all. many excited discussions here fail
to progress past 1, "oh, I SEE what you meant!" is often
their death knell.
mircea_popescu: phase 1, when
the mind reads.
this is
the normal state, whether you're
trying
to understand another's implementration or
the republican design or clicking on
tit pictures, you're in phase 1.
mircea_popescu: but yes, if you change version you're in a different situation
than here contemplated.
mircea_popescu: there's a lot of various mechanisms
that conspire
to work
together, just, gotta get human element
to stop orcing it all up
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform esp with
the
trilema-style js links youi can link
to arbitrary spot
diana_coman: ftr for
the serpent ada implementation I wrote
the
testing part: grabbed published
test vectors and wrote a snippet
to eat
them up, call
the serpent, check results, complain if any mismatch
mircea_popescu: the "here's how
to add a new activity
to foxybot" one does, yes.
mircea_popescu: but coding is coder-centric not code-centric. leave aside
teh faux modesties of githubs and other usgtardations and set
things on
their proper footing : coding is all about
the coder.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform not a matter of
the
thing. a matter of you. "ima spend a week banging on
this next month, and
then maybe i pick it up agaion next year" is
the scheduling form ; and
this means
there's a post sometime next month
mircea_popescu: and more generally -- gotta organize your own process
to interop sanely with others.
mircea_popescu: no.
that's when you stop altogether. when you stop working on it FOR NOW
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform yes but
this is notoriously bad arrangement. put
them in a single node in a place organized for
this.
mircea_popescu: a snipped of code IS NOT SUFFICIENT. you gotta say ALL SORTS of
things. such as
this, yes, how it was
tested and for what. and so following.
mircea_popescu: re
the "I don't even know whether he
tested it or how otherwise;" bit --
this is
the sad effect of publishing pastes/github links etc.
diana_coman: oh, certainly; I wasn't under any illusion
that ada==pascal, no;
there is some danger in
the perceived similarity
too, basically
the "false friend"
type
diana_coman: oh, ugh; and yes, now you mention it I
think it was same-change in Ro
too
☟︎ diana_coman: aha, I liked it
too; but
then everywhere I went it was ...java/c/cpp
a111: Logged on 2017-11-15 11:34 diana_coman: I don't even know whether he
tested it or how otherwise; also not sure if
there isn't some way around using Strings.Unbounded
mircea_popescu: BingoBoingo it's also only functional if we really have enough of a bottom line
to make weekly wires feasible. nobody's wiring 300 bux
BingoBoingo: <mircea_popescu> if more
than 1 customers option
to pay via wire,
the price is lowered by 1% in rounds until only one is left standing. << Now
this is interesting
BingoBoingo: <mircea_popescu> so if you pay vat on
the racks, see how exactly you qualify
to get it back. << More is
to be done here
diana_coman: I don't even know whether he
tested it or how otherwise; also not sure if
there isn't some way around using Strings.Unbounded
☟︎ diana_coman: I've been playing around with
the keccak implementation from PeterL and it seems overall all right
☟︎ deedbot: 2017/09/16 03:22:27 <PeterL> Why is it
that papers written by one guy still insist on using
the "We" form for all
the
things
they do?
mircea_popescu: this is pureblood fixing, much like prices were established back when
the jews did it, before socialists murdering
them all and
taking over.
mircea_popescu: if more
than 1 customers option
to pay via wire,
the price is lowered by 1% in rounds until only one is left standing.
mircea_popescu: each of its customers has a choice : can either settle
the amt due in bitcoin, at
the proposed rate, or else can offer
to make wire payment, for
the
TOTAL amount only.
mircea_popescu: every fixing day (arbitrary day of week we choose),
tmsr.isp lists
the
TOTAL it has
to pay, and makes a bitcoin/usd offer. it can be arbitrarily anything, but in practice it'll be
the output of !~ticker --market all Volume-weighted last average: bit (which is fucking ridiculous already, we're
tracking bitfinex who
the fuck came up with
this) or else whatever rate whatever exchange
the isp uses.
☟︎☟︎ mircea_popescu: (if you do. govts are notoriously iffy about ACTUALLY living up
to
the part of
their promise where money flows back out)
mircea_popescu: so if you pay vat on
the racks, see how exactly you qualify
to get it back.
mircea_popescu: ie, if you buy a 1mn worth of widgets, 22% vat, and
then you sell
them, for 1.1mn, 22% vat, you will get back 220k worth of vat
to offset your 242k obligation, leaving you with a 22k vat net payment on
the .1mn you actually added.
mircea_popescu: BingoBoingo it's a VALUE ADDED
tax. you get it back when you export.
BingoBoingo: The problem is
the "services" VAT hits on
the rack
mircea_popescu: BingoBoingo
the problem with vat is
that yes it's fucking annoying. but on one hand it generally replaces
tarriffs, ie contrary
to how annoying it is it has a neutral delta (case of dun shoot
the messenger) and on
the other hand many jurisdictions offer credible solutions. eg, romania has no vat for corps under a certain
threshold, which is why i have corps
there.