23600+ entries in 0.135s

mircea_popescu: the one thing
i really don't like is that wtf block devices of two block sizes.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform
i looked at the both of them things, what can
i tell you.
mircea_popescu: nobody's walking anywhere with any rsa pills. now that
i'm willing to die with.
mircea_popescu: "hey guise ?
i have a mathematical definition of blockchipher, and guess what comes for free with it."
mircea_popescu: in short, because this winding discussion risks overwhelming buffers, the salient points are a) that
i'm not ready to go to war over serpent, it's a meh-maybe item ; b) that building our spearheads around items we're not willing to die for may be how the converse of
http://btcbase.org/log-search?q=bitcoin+corrupts altogether.
☟︎ mircea_popescu: it seriously never fucking was meant to be gone over with a microscope, "oh satoshi how could you". fuck you
i should wear a caliper attached to my pants in case
i doodle in the restaurant also ?
mircea_popescu: so yes,
i fully expect they'll buy, and then admire the hole we've dug ourselves in : five years down the road, say, as a mental experiment, we've sold 100k of these units, they're 90% of all we've sold, and well... they're still blockshiters. and what's next ? say
i utter a fatah against block "ciphering", for good technical reasons or just because
i'm insane -- IT DOESNT MATTER, and lo there'll be a lordship schism because
mircea_popescu:
i don't expect it'd be a bad thing to have. it's certainly way the fuck more than the whole "market" of the whole "security industry" slash barn.
mircea_popescu: that's what
i mean, "a picture of its possible strength emerges from ample discussion of its possible weaknesses"
mircea_popescu: now, maybe after eulora's run for a half decade, and there's ACTUAL ~publshed~ research by ACTUAL humans re its strength, THEN
i can revisit this discussion from a different hand
mircea_popescu:
i agree with that, but im not sure symmetric cipher hdd wins that much.
mircea_popescu:
i am experimenting with serpent, and yes it's borne of that ancient discussion of ours, but
i'm nowhere near-ready to bake it into "this is tmsr secure disk"
☟︎ mircea_popescu: so you don't see my point when
i say "well... disk and everytihng else line-crypto really needs tmsr-cryptochip first" ?
a111: Logged on 2018-10-04 00:14 asciilifeform:
i.e. unreplicable crapola where one'd have to catch the authors and connect'em to 220v to get the orig data, supposing it existed
a111: Logged on 2018-01-05 01:03 asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: the secondary stack thing worx correctly in modern-day gnat. but
i banned it. ( because it makes reading disasmed binariolade harder; reasoning about the semantics of the latter -- also harder; and consumes very scarce, on small embedded chips, memory , imho needlessly )
a111: Logged on 2018-07-18 14:13 asciilifeform: btw did
i ever discuss why
i forbid the secondary stack ?
a111: Logged on 2018-10-26 02:26 asciilifeform:
i suspect that String Must-Die(tm)
a111: Logged on 2018-10-26 02:26 asciilifeform: my only remaining notion here is that possibly gotta implement a 'paths' lib !
i.e. would represent paths as arrays of permanently fixed length , 255 octets, iirc this is the max permitted on unixlikes.
a111: Logged on 2018-10-26 02:18 asciilifeform: my current hypothesis is that we're literally the only folx ever to bake static libs (
i.e. in .gpr, for Library_Kind use "static"; ) .
trinque: indeed,
I have all the tars necessary to build, will provide 'em
trinque:
I could possibly have you a newer thing to try this weekend; that's the goal
trinque:
I'm going to need to get my teeth into cuntoo this weekend before
I can help you with lappy. what was in that tarball is very out of date.
lobbesbot: trinque: Sent 3 days, 0 hours, and 36 minutes ago: <asciilifeform>
http://p.bvulpes.com/pastes/dI29G/?raw=true << very peculiar barfology from existing ( same tarball
i successfully used for s.mg box ) cuntoo. sat for 4 hrs, built both gcc's, etc., then ended with this.
a111: Logged on 2018-10-25 20:45 Mocky: apparently kuwait computers are shit and one chick knows another chick who runs "cyber security" for a kuwaiti / iraqi company, has been in there for 30 years, knows everyone in the biz. promised me a kuwaiti business sponsor if
I actually know anything about computer security, put her number in my phone for me, and texted her to expect contact from me
Mocky: apparently kuwait computers are shit and one chick knows another chick who runs "cyber security" for a kuwaiti / iraqi company, has been in there for 30 years, knows everyone in the biz. promised me a kuwaiti business sponsor if
I actually know anything about computer security, put her number in my phone for me, and texted her to expect contact from me
☟︎ Mocky: oh my god BingoBoingo
I'm so fucking tired
a111: Logged on 2018-10-25 19:17 asciilifeform: anyway
i'ma leave it at this, will bbl:meat.
a111: Logged on 2018-10-08 16:20 mircea_popescu: because no, the "
i know ~exactly~ what the computer is doing" declaration is not optional. exactly like socrates' observation, "the man claiming no political system has political system", exactly so, whatever the claim, to run code on machine equals the declaration of having fully read and thoroughly understood. there's no wiggle room.
a111: Logged on 2018-10-25 18:59 bvt: well,
i did not suggest learning/utilizing C api, on the contrary, a subset of kernel stuff in ada is the interesting thing. it just happens to be currently defined/documented as C code.
bvt: well,
i did not suggest learning/utilizing C api, on the contrary, a subset of kernel stuff in ada is the interesting thing. it just happens to be currently defined/documented as C code.
☟︎ a111: Logged on 2018-10-25 18:25 asciilifeform: my udp lib is ~600 line, and not 6000, because
i went in this direction.
mircea_popescu:
i suspect noboduy's getting out of cataloguing the shit that easily, but we see.
bvt: everything system-dependent that
i've seen in gnat runtime goes into C code.
bvt: re syscalls -- fair enough. but imo this shows extreme brokeness of linux portability --
i can't think about a sane reason for syscall numbers to differ across arches.
bvt: asciilifeform: re exotic flags -- sure. but
i don't expect different results with syscall numbers as well. some subset will match, later in the table -- complete mess