asciilifeform: and a dependence on the machine to resolve questions which ought to be resolved by the mind, and thus kept 'light weight' enough to be easily resolved by the mind.
asciilifeform: but the argument here is not about sabotaged ken-thompson-style tools. but about tools that foster intellectual atrophy.☟︎
asciilifeform: (less easy to test if it is -capable- of lying, but that's another matter)
asciilifeform: it is very easy to test if my text editor is lying.
asciilifeform: idea is not 'which was diddled' but which one encourages reliance on greater and greater machine 'intelligence'
asciilifeform: software is helping to the extent it is reasonable. for instance, i am trusting my text editor to display the actual source and not some diddled version.
asciilifeform: and whiners who complain that this is arduous, unreasonable, etc. - are shown where the door is.
asciilifeform: one would read instructions. another, turn a wrench, whatever. third would check that 2 corresponds to 1. then, all three sign under that step in recipe.☟︎☟︎☟︎☟︎
asciilifeform: undata: do you know how soviet nukes and spacecraft were assembled?
asciilifeform: but don't be surprised if it is treated in the same way as the phoundation's original - at the very best, a place to steal bug fixes from.
asciilifeform: or, alternatively, create own fork, with own point...
asciilifeform: undata: if you want to understand the whole point of the fork, try to understand what you lose when you choose a vcs as a canonical representation.
asciilifeform: ben_vulpes, the one fellow who is really still working on this gizmo, is
asciilifeform: undata: you are perfectly welcome to use a vcs of whatever flavour appeals to you
asciilifeform: but i will only sign deltas which consist of information which i can fully view.
asciilifeform: it's bad enough that we are dealing with a turd that is quite impossible to fully understand in the original.
asciilifeform: let's put it another way. i will not sign anything that i cannot read.
asciilifeform: others can disagree, and sign the empire state building.
asciilifeform: but it is that output, and only that, which i am willing to sign.
asciilifeform: undata: well, to the extent that any version control system can be cudgelled into coughing up output compatible with 'patch' - then yes.
asciilifeform: how much of what is on your computer right now, actually -does- something ?
asciilifeform: try to understand the nature of this 'nuke sub' and the pitfalls of tying one's fortune to 'darcs' or a similarly 'intelligent' instrument.
asciilifeform: but it is only a tool that some people prefer to use. a 'git' or other similar gizmo will not be the authoritative representation of bitcoind.
asciilifeform: it even, iirc, comes with a gpg signing gizmo
asciilifeform: Adlai: on the contrary, several people (even you?) are using 'git'
asciilifeform: i guess there's something pleasurable in seeing the moduli
asciilifeform l0lz that folks are using 'phuctor' as a key viewer
asciilifeform: (only updates when someone craps a key in)
asciilifeform: lol wasn't meant to be used as an authoritative keyserver.
asciilifeform: 'Who steals my purse steals trash; 'tis something, nothing; 'Twas mine, 'tis his, and has been slave to thousands; But he that filches from me my good name...'
asciilifeform: one could in principle maintain a bitcoin 'keypair' for the purpose of abusing it for public key signatures
asciilifeform: whether this particular microscope is fit for use as a hammer, depends on two very separate questions - what you think of ecdsa, and what you think of bitcoind
