202400+ entries in 0.534s
mircea_popescu: but
to a large degree i can predict what
the ailments of
the women naked on
the floor will be as
time withers
them.
mircea_popescu: there's no dispute whatsoever
then. except maybe for
this much :
that problem is a problem in
the sense
thermic death is a problem. always and everywhere without let or respite.
phf: i don't ~refuse~ it, i'm saying
that differential approach is ~required~ because
there's a problem. otherwise
there'd be no need for an approach. i don't
think it matters
that approach is already presant for other purposes
mircea_popescu: i can judge whether an egg is rotten or not without being a hen myself. i can
tell which kids aren't worth bothering with
though i'm no mother "and i don't understand
them like she does" etcetera.
mircea_popescu: where i
tell
two people
to do
the same
thing and compare
the results.
phf: what's
the differential approach?
phf: i didn't understand previous sentence, so i refuse
to be led down a path
towards a
trap :p
mircea_popescu: to
try and resolve it : do you believe i could be a successful genovese merchant if i couldn't add ?
mircea_popescu: yes, and
the objection
to
this is
that you for some reason refuse
the cornerstone of management, which is
the differential approach.
phf: the problem broadly speaking is
that our solution
to
trust is "read
the source code", in order
to
trust compiler you read
the source code of
the compiler.
the
trust chain
terminates at bootstrapping. you can't "just" bootstrap on an untrusted system, you have
to enumerate defensive approaches
mircea_popescu: (to continue link above :
the prb idiocy "oh code is spec" is not invented by
the idiots for
this occasion. it's universally at
the basis of contemporaneous cs, and it's all permeating. it stars with
the expectation
that you can
tell whether
the code you wrote is correct BY WHETHER
THE MACHINE WORKS.
this is utter fucking nonsense!111 appealing
to
tweens, perhaps, but still nonsense.)
mircea_popescu: ok, but if you meant it in
that sense i no longer see how it anticipates
the very problem.
phf: well,
the plurality makes it non-linear, of course each one can be linear
mircea_popescu: and i suspect
this goes
to (one of
the) roots of
the argument : it is not broadly speaking sane for person writing code
to expect
that he knows what compiler user will use
to produce object or machine code.
mircea_popescu: yes, but
this is not in reference
to compilation. it's in reference
to user space. i don't expect
there's a magical function f, but
that
there's a plurality of f1..fi...fn, which can all be linear in principle.
phf: i
think
the word you used was "unary"
phf: the need
to not
treat
the binary as a black box and also
the need for non-linear compilation
mircea_popescu: phf my hm hasn't returned yet. what conditions are presupposed
that anticipate
the problem ?
phf: then gosling wrote a version of emacs for a unix machine,
that was used by rms as
the foundation for his emacs
phf: well, since already spoilt, original emacs was written by a bunch of different people for
TECO and long after rms became maintainer of
that.
then greenberg rewrote it in lisp (multics emacs)
mircea_popescu: (i am not, for clarity, declaring he didn't anymore
than i'm declaring he did. i personally dun gas.)
mircea_popescu: make some claims, source
the claims, insist
the sourcing's balanced, you know, like serious court reporter say.
Framedragger: a port
totally counts. however, as
to your general point, no.
mircea_popescu: ie, didja read
the history, confront variants from multiple people ?
Framedragger: didn't rms implement emacs by ~himself? or
that doesn't count?
mircea_popescu: so in idiots
this decays
to "what should i do here ?" "uh i dunno, but X is more friendly
to our shared delusions of equality, humanism and our democracy!"
mircea_popescu: (no, noticing a nail and going "oh, i remember hammer can hit nails" is NOT
technical ability. a ditzy blonde / bright dog can do
the fucking same.
technical ability is when you can say ~use x, because no other
tool is more adequate here~.
that's
technical fucking ability.)
mircea_popescu: and by people with no
technical ability i mean
the likes of ian murdock or rms.
the lot of
them, really.
a111: Logged on 2017-04-04 15:59
trinque: nah
thing appears entirely political, in
that it [appeared
to have] enabled
this maximal user freedom
thing
mircea_popescu:
http://btcbase.org/log/2017-04-04#1637022 << yes,
to a large degree
the usage of
the "tools" is more a function of
the presence of
the
tools
than of
the presence of a need. just like while car is useful item, if you stop $random car occupant will not be able
to explain what he's doing.
☝︎ mircea_popescu: asciilifeform
talk about beta ingestion. i bet you
the "diet" dorks eat more
than shaves off my grinders.
a111: Logged on 2017-04-04 15:02
trinque: and if some idiot provides a vpatch
that enables dbus, you simply do not use his key in .wot
mircea_popescu:
http://btcbase.org/log/2017-04-04#1636999 << in
theory
this is how it should work ; in practice
the sloppy git style does not work with
the republican sig nuking. it'll just whine
that "dependencies". basically, we're
trying
to get software from where it builds spirogyra strands
to where it builds ACTUAL
TREES.
☝︎ mircea_popescu: can't say as i have. by
the age i was hanging out with
the rave sluts i was no longer playing with magnets.
mircea_popescu: "oh, and you're really pissed at
that guy ?" "yeah man
totally. i hate
that guy."
mircea_popescu: i don't
think anyone
takes carbon dating seriously. outside of
the you know, "ring" so
to speak. it's a
trade secret of
the substance and nature of wrestling storylines.
mircea_popescu: i vaguely remember some guy
trying
to do something along
those lines re nuclear waste recycling
a111: Logged on 2017-04-04 12:28 mircea_popescu: phf
the main objection
to your quiet style is
that now i can't discern whether you a) understood
the arguments and are
thinking about it ; b) simply didn't understand
the arguments or c) understood what was said but didn't judge it any kind of argument. express yourself, don't repress yourself!
jhvh1: asciilifeform:
The operation succeeded.
BingoBoingo: See also just about any small engine powered equipment part other
than fuel line
trinque: RMS, wrathful old
testament god, confuses
the language of
the people
to prevent another
tower of Microshit from being built.
trinque: sure it does, but someone had
to
think
the user getting
to do what he wants was a good
thing first
trinque: doesn't discount
the beardcrust factor either. "If we maximally shuffle
the circumstances around us, surely *someone* will fuck us. Anything can happen."
trinque: was *entirely* intentional in
the way wave of human meat strategy is intentional
trinque: "hurd" was supposed
to be
the culmination of
this
trinque: use whatever libs, whatever userland, and everything will magically work because democracy is a
thing.
trinque: nah
thing appears entirely political, in
that it [appeared
to have] enabled
this maximal user freedom
thing
☟︎ a111: Logged on 2016-08-22 13:59 asciilifeform:
http://btcbase.org/log/2016-08-22#1526615 << my complaint is
that it adds a meg of UNREADABLE and - largely UNTESTABLE (i do not have a VMS box, nor a machine with zsh or ksh, nor do i intend
to , and i REFUSE
to sign code
that claims
to run
there , srsly wtf omfg) - and
that it introduces massive
turd, useless language m4, go and learn it, read
the implementation
trinque: there's caked shit
there in
the spot; what did you want?