239000+ entries in 0.15s
trinque: so
then it
tends
towards why warehouse
this at all
trinque: I address my counterposition
to
this in
thread.
a111: Logged on 2016-12-02 19:49 asciilifeform: as in, you should be able
to verify it solely by possessing
the rating +
the pubkey of
the rater.
a111: Logged on 2016-12-02 19:49 danielpbarron:
there is no "verifying a rating" beyond asking
the rater yourself
mircea_popescu: there's absolutely no valuable information
that would be lost if you fucked up
the db
today and we had
to re-do it. just inconvenience
to a lot of live people, but it's of
the nature of "tee hee i garbled everyone's shopping lists as found on
the fridge" not of
the "tee hee i burned all extant aramaic manuscripts".
a111: Logged on 2016-12-02 19:42
trinque: but at any rate, making
the WoT something
that can be rebuilt from public information when I am dead is a good
thing
mircea_popescu:
http://btcbase.org/log/2016-12-02#1576515 << it is not a good
thing in any sense.
think for a moment : if
the ratings are live, which is
to say,
they actually do stand up
to
their purpose of "if you
try
to eval x ask
these people",
then
those people will re-advertise. if
they do not,
then
they should have been deleted in
the first place.
☝︎ ben_vulpes: if 'gymnastics',
then does it really matter?
mircea_popescu: yes i had
the keys out. but
to pee not
to make johnny little brothers.
ben_vulpes: the keys are out already, spend five seconds
to write a
thing if it matters
to you.
ben_vulpes: oh come now you had
the keys out when decrypting deedbot's pad
mircea_popescu: this
theoretical problem is evinced in practice by
the expiration problem - what do you do about all
the ratings i may have signed ? so you have rating for x at
time
t, what's
this say ? is it correct or isn't it correct ?
a111: Logged on 2016-12-02 19:49 asciilifeform: ratings are
the one clearest case for 'must stand alone'
mircea_popescu:
http://btcbase.org/log/2016-12-02#1576521 <<
they are ?! why ? i have no intention for my rating of X
to be opposable
to me. it is information i provide free of charge and on an as-is basis, literally saying "if you're
trying
to eval X i may be able
to help". it would be
the height of impudence for y
to demand something on
the basis of "i have
this here signed
thing".
☝︎ ben_vulpes: ("fewer
than eight cylinders? communist. more
than eight cylinders? communist."
tm r
those car guys)
a111: Logged on 2016-12-02 19:44
trinque:
that is in no way equivalent
a111: Logged on 2016-12-02 19:39
trinque: if ratings were
this kind of material I could chatter
them
to anyone interested as
they are received, and conceivably "only chatter me
things about
the L2 of <key>"
a111: Logged on 2016-12-02 19:24
trinque: I lean
towards flipping
the model
to "decrypt and sign
this command + OTP" vs "decrypt and send in
the clear
this OTP"
mircea_popescu:
http://btcbase.org/log/2016-12-02#1576496 <<
this is a bad idea, for multiple reasons. one of
them being
that it requires
to give sign capacity
to
the clients, which is deeply undesirable ; another being
that it encourages a retarded notion/expectation of repudiability.
☝︎ a111: Logged on 2016-12-02 19:13 mats:
this will sound naive, but humans in outer space represents an ideal of social cooperation and unity of purpose - against
the environment
trying
to kill us -
that i feel we've long since lost
a111: Logged on 2016-12-02 19:03 asciilifeform:
they are in
the gorbachev 'kooperativ' phase
mircea_popescu: not
that it's bad for kids,
though it does promote some
tilt
towards
the
tomboyish look in girls
that i don't find welcome.
a111: Logged on 2016-12-02 18:50 asciilifeform: aha, in
the 'black schools'
there is neverending fight, like in a prison, and even bouncers
to pry apart especially eager folk. and everyone with 'room
temperature iq' however you measure it, also
a111: Logged on 2016-12-02 18:48 asciilifeform: i
thought
that all children played like
this...
mircea_popescu: with
the light. you can put a chick
to sleep right now by covering its head.
the brain is eye-powered like in frogs.
a111: Logged on 2016-12-02 21:36 mircea_popescu: how is a squire supposed
to fatten into a sphere properly if
there's no meal between lunch and dinner ?
mircea_popescu:
http://btcbase.org/log/2016-12-02#1576455 << running
the "oh,
that wasn't a wedding, who goes out in
the desert
to have weddings (outside of weirdo californians) and
there was no leftover food or musical instruments or anything)" side by side with
the AP footage showing all
the lively colored bedding and pots and pans and various bits of goatfucker musical instruments is quite
the COIN exercise.
☝︎ jhvh1: danielpbarron: [KJV] Matthew 8:22 :: But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let
the dead bury
their dead.
danielpbarron: re preserving log: we don't sign each line we send. but feel free
to sign
the whole
thing
mircea_popescu: how is a squire supposed
to fatten into a sphere properly if
there's no meal between lunch and dinner ?
☟︎ mircea_popescu: aaand we find
teh english has no equivalent of ojina/užina wtf is
this bs.
mircea_popescu waves. i shall write
this short i woke up with and read all
this!
trinque: if ratings are ephemeral, seems logs must also be. relevant here
that we
tend
to rate in
the logs.
trinque: we keep
the logs, presumably forever
trinque: something else comes
to mind;
there exists in our logs a person named
trinque who is not
the present
trinque
☟︎ phf: well, speaking of history audit
trail does introduce explicit history where
there wasn't any
trinque: it is my history with
the person eval'd
to what I deem
the present state
trinque: I meant "I used
to be peered with / do business with /
talk
to X, but may no longer"
phf: neither current wot nor gossipd spec wot have
the history component, because if you go by "there's no rating outside of rater" past ratings make absolutely no difference.
trinque: whereas I see
them as distinct; wot is
the history of my past and present gossipd connections, and indications of what I
thought of
them
trinque: and
then yes, can't
talk
to a deadman in either case.
trinque: I could see an argument
that
the WoT evolves into
the gossipd graph.
trinque: it becomes hard
to distinguish from
the gossipd-graph, eh?
phf: for me wot is a partial externalization of a hawala network and as far as -1,0,1 is concerned ~perhaps~ indicates prevalent opinions among
the people whose opinion i value, but by convention only. in
this sense
the wot follows
the lords and not
the other way around. it has some practical use like serving as a door bouncer and ostensibly letting newbs know who
to
talk
to.
trinque: if it is better
to forget, lets make
that explicit. when/why, and not just as an artifact of being built on shoddy computing infrastructure.
☟︎ trinque: at least now we're in a position
to discuss
the cost/benefit of a forgetful WoT.
phf: well, dpb dropped out of
this conversation, and i apparently have isolated understanding of wot.
phf: oh so you were saying fundamental disagreement between you and danielpbarron rather
than me
phf: asciilifeform: ok, my point was
that i don't see how
that's a more fundamental
than "no rating outside of rater"
phf: but what am i going
to do with
that knowledge? i'd still have
to ask somebody (presumably you)
to both proove overwnship of phuctor bot and
to explain
to me what
those ratings mean. or else you have a document
that you prepared
that explains
the logic, etc.
phf: i'm not going
to go asking a111 what he meant by it, and i would laugh
to anyone who'd
try
phf: if i were
to give a pubkey
to a111 and it starts rating people based on how many btcbase references
they make a day (there's a quota!)
phf: i don't know if we disagree
there, but i don't see how
that makes a difference
phf: asciilifeform: well, but what's
the "more fundamental disagreement" stated?
trinque: it is also not necessary
to say
that because ratings exist in
the past I must care about
them as much as
those more recent
trinque: are ratings ephemeral indications
to consult
the author or are
they permanent marks
phf: ~ratings are meaningless outside of rater~
this is our fundamental disagreement
trinque: before another bout of
triggering happens, I
think
this well defines
the debate
phf: asciilifeform: when did vpatch come in? what
the fuck
phf: well, if
that's a common understanding,
then i don't understand mp's what is wot article
trinque: if my dead grandfather hated someone, I would most certainly care about
that given
that he was a man I respected.
☟︎ phf: traditionally
this is solved with "obama dun did it, i hear him knocking on
the door"
phf: well, what's
the
thinking here?
that after your death all negrated entities are "possible suspects"?