log☇︎
202600+ entries in 0.127s
asciilifeform: ben_vulpes: it isn't hard to do, no; i have it (tentatively) working right here. but -- it ~is~ O(n).
asciilifeform: and i dun give a nanofuck that 'nightclubs there are small and crowded'. su circa 1975 had 0 nightclubs and i'd pick it over anywhere in known solar system, yes i would.
ben_vulpes: asciilifeform: walking the blockchain in search of payments to a pubkey or pubkey hash, and indexing those in some manner (accounting for spends) such that they can be reconstituted into a transaction later
phf: i know a few argentinians through yoga jet set crowd, and they are pleasant and fun company if nothing else. i prefer them to americans or germans most of the time
asciilifeform: ben_vulpes: what precisely are you thinking of attempting?
asciilifeform: ( i will say, 0 of the things that drove mircea_popescu barking mad about the place, bother me at all. then again i was there for a week.. ) ☟︎
a111: Logged on 2017-04-02 17:30 asciilifeform: whaddayamean they don't sit around , retired and deposed colonels, deciding which fighting cock to sell, before starving
phf: http://btcbase.org/log/2017-04-02#1636040 << all i knew about argentina i read in borges, casares and cortazar. i suspect if that argentina ever existed it's long dead ☝︎
ben_vulpes: http://btc.yt/lxr/satoshi/source/src/main.h?v=wires_rev1#0261 << kinda looks like all one needs to bake CTxIn's is the hash of the transaction and output index, can someone spot check this for me? ☟︎
deedbot: http://www.contravex.com/2017/04/03/who-needs-to-learn-languages-when-you-have-google-translate/ << » Contravex: A blog by Pete Dushenski - Who needs to learn languages when you have Google Translate?
ben_vulpes: "hey babe, want to be my second wife?"
mircea_popescu: why, great day to propose marriage to long term fiance.
ben_vulpes: so damn believeable though
ben_vulpes: shaking the rss reader *out unread
ben_vulpes: this is what i get for not shaking the rss reader unread on the second
ben_vulpes: sounds like $pet had an eye on the depletion meter
mircea_popescu: so how do they get refilled then ?
trinque: you see where he keeps those canisters?
asciilifeform: i'ma bbl, gotta change gask mask canister; and pet has been 'come to bedroom!111' for 2hrs nao..
asciilifeform: it makes 0 sense to merge the categories.
asciilifeform: i have plenty of 'c machines' right here that cannot run trb (on account of 'too small addr space' or 'too slow clock', take your pick.)
mircea_popescu: as in made of tits ?
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform not trb's identity was being defined. the c machine's was.
asciilifeform: ben_vulpes: titanium car would work quite well.
asciilifeform: it is related in that it makes 0 sense to include 'c' as part of its identity.
mircea_popescu: not sure how that's related, but by all means.
asciilifeform: to become legitimately 'an algorithm', rather than 'this thing a particular moron shat out'
asciilifeform: it has to cease to be a cpp proggy.
asciilifeform: but of the nature of the beast.
asciilifeform: not speaking of machines here, i dun have a 'large comp that ain't a c machine' to even test with.
mircea_popescu: i don't see how it'll seriously run on anything besides a c machine for the mid term.
asciilifeform: at any rate this is a bizarre line of thought. trb (or rather, bitcoin, the existing network) has any kind of long term future ~strictly~ if it can be entirely separated from the cpp abortion.
asciilifeform: not one that has 64k of addr space, say.
mircea_popescu: as opposed to items that are toys, or turds, or tonsils.
mircea_popescu: no. it encompasses any iotem that is a computer.
asciilifeform: this is not much of a definition, it encompasses more or less any comp that is large enough
mircea_popescu: yes. definition of "lisp machine" ALSO IS "item which runs trb"
asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: it ain't 'the software', either, it's a set of algos, they do not even take much paper to describe.
asciilifeform: trb (the currently existing item) could quite conceivably run on entirely different type of machine, under emulation (smbx , for instance, shipped... believe -- a c compiler, in genera. along with fortran, ada..)
mircea_popescu: it's slowly emerged into obviousness that pretending "bitcoin is software" makes in fact 0 sense, and is entirely borne of idiocy. bitcoin is not "userland". bitcoin is the whole thing.
mircea_popescu: c machine does have a specific meaning, and it is "item which runs trb."
asciilifeform: 'c machine' has a specific meaning, refers to the type of cpu that traces descent to the transistor-impoverished 1970s, when bounds check was seen as unaffordable luxury.
asciilifeform: 0. but it is imho odd to describe the process as 'fixes c machine'
mircea_popescu: work on massaging the protoypes is work towards the item prototyped, what's so unpalatable about this.
asciilifeform: by looking at the data structures.
mircea_popescu: and how did we find this out ?
asciilifeform: ( this also ignores the -- screamingly evident -- fact of trb being ~algorithmically~ defective. as explored on several occasions here. )
mircea_popescu: "c machine" defined as "item that runs trb" is thereby fixed through becoming more apparent than it previously was.
asciilifeform: and this 'fixes c machine' how ?
mircea_popescu: at the very least things were learned about how trb is ~supposed to~ function, and this is sufficient to qualify it.
mircea_popescu: that has nothin to do however.
asciilifeform: this in fact is a practical definition of 'turd' in our context : item that, massage it as you will, is still fundamentally broken by design.
asciilifeform: because the conceptual foundations are retarded.
asciilifeform: any day of the week, thing can be silently and imperceptibly broken.
asciilifeform: that is the fundamental discovery of 25 years of c idiocy.
asciilifeform: masssaging of turd -- produces turd, not ferrocement.
asciilifeform: do what you will to trb, it is still written in idiot language that does not check bounds, on idiot iron that does not check bounds.
mircea_popescu: in any case : it's work done upon a portion of the c machine. what more is needed to qualify ?
mircea_popescu: well, if you are found with dead body and smoking gun, you'll have to prove the negative alright.
asciilifeform: the presumption that i have to prove the negative here, is ludicrous.
asciilifeform: how do i know that it does not also propel the earth along its orbit.
mircea_popescu: how do you know this ?
asciilifeform: not a single second of time spent reading or massaging shitoshi's liquishit, contributed anything whatsoever to the c machine problem.
mircea_popescu: i don't see they are distinct.
a111: Logged on 2017-03-14 17:34 mircea_popescu: http://btcbase.org/log/2017-03-14#1626921 << yes. there's absolutely no argument that bitcoin dying on the enemy's terms would be an unmitigated catastrophe. chernobyl pales in comparison, it'd be on the level of "wheel is useless anyway" wisdom of dropped-on-head amerindians, or "oh pretty, spinning wheels" greek steam engine. utterly catastrophic. which is why eg http://trilema.com/2013/mpoe-march-2013-statement/#selection
asciilifeform: it was all, to date, 100% life support, strictly to forestall http://btcbase.org/log/2017-03-14#1627008 . ☝︎
mircea_popescu: it is trying to fix the trb, which is a component of the c machine, defined as "runs trb"
asciilifeform: mno, 0 of the work to date did anything whatsoever to 'fix c machine'
mircea_popescu: in any proper statement, all the eg trb foundation's work goes towards one fold of "fixing c machine" in this sense.
asciilifeform: the compiler is now gargantuan. and neither it, nor the binaries disasmed, 'fit in head.'
asciilifeform: one possible 'fix' is ada-shaped -- compiler makes up for the retardations of c machine, inserts array bounds checks, type checks, etc.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform "runs trb".
mircea_popescu: but i don't have enough elements piled up to say what elements i need to say whether this is so or not.
asciilifeform: describe the 'fix'
mircea_popescu: the other vaguely relevant point is that it's probably cheaper to fix the c machine than to build the lisp machine.
asciilifeform: i also suspect that any system that can be thompsonized, eventually will be (given as it propagates, the transformation is permanent). but that is separate point.
asciilifeform: really reduces to 'any system that doesn't fit in head is trivially thompsonized.'
asciilifeform: that was the only point of contention, from asciilifeform .
asciilifeform: but oughta see that thompson is an absolute bar to hygienic computing ~with gcc~ or any other similarly complex compiler.
asciilifeform: presently i suspect that mircea_popescu has a correct understanding of thompson.
mircea_popescu: ~all my interest in this dispute is the imo important point that thompson issue & friends is no actual bar to republican computing.
asciilifeform: and then anything with ~it~.
mircea_popescu: but we were discussing what we can do rather than what's done, or such was my understanding.
asciilifeform: BUT the unfortunate bit is that there are ALSO a variety of ways to end up back ~in~.
asciilifeform: 'it wouldn't do.' 'only a terrorist would.'
asciilifeform: but mircea_popescu has it, there is a variety of ways to break out of a hypothetically thompsonized universe. but -- for some reason -- ~entirely 'not done'.
asciilifeform: the one where 'i can read an eprom without a comp. and write it without a comp. now where is your thompson bomb.'
asciilifeform: but yes, you can elementarily 'exit the cave' by using grid paper, head compiler, toggles. in fact this was one of the first ( the first ?) threads with asciilifeform on mircea_popescu's www comment section
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform the outlined plan was to read it, pare it down for the function contemplated, compile it with itself etc.
mircea_popescu: obviously, "i choose to live in usg" means... you chose to live in usg. "but i had no other options". hurr.
asciilifeform: (rather than by, as bellard did, compiling with gcc.)
asciilifeform: tcc not so, but only if you bootstrap it by hand-compiling to grid paper and entering via toggles.
mircea_popescu: and tcc idem ?
asciilifeform: and the latter is largely unexplored
asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: it is conceivable that no one now living has ever used a 'pre-patch' gcc. that's the idea, that 'gcc' is not in fact defined by its src, but by the aggregate of 'the published src' + 'the extant sets of built gccs'
mircea_popescu: phf and if you don't keep the machine online, you don't.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform elementarily, i saw the item run pre-patched, now i see it run patched.
asciilifeform: say it introduces an off-by-one 0.001% of the time.
phf: if i have an open ssh port on my machine that i don't know about, then the attack can happen any time in between "rotor3" released "i decide to install rotor3""
mircea_popescu: well ok, so the understanding of the thompson bootstrap problem is that it's not an absolute bar to bootstrapping, but a possible pitfall ?