log☇︎
3300+ entries in 0.004s
mp_en_viaje: for that matter : by the time the 60s rolled around there were adult tejanos all over texas shaking their head at this elvis greasy, faggoty bs and thinking back to a greater time in, say, 1890, back when cattle was still speaking spanish and the east coast dudes hadn't really shown up with their idioties, "how to make it all cheap". while in the actual 1890, actual mexicans in texas were looking up through almanacs at the
mp_en_viaje: but the end's always gonna be buey zaraza, tus ojos tristones mirando la huella parecen buscar el milagro de aquellos pasitos que al irse la ingrata no supo dejar. it has to.
mp_en_viaje: no joke about the spanyards, either. Mientras que, bajo el peso del trigo, los ejes cansados los siento quejar, yo, anudando mi pena a esa queja, con cantos y silbos te sé acompañar. is a fucking thing, which they did. thoroughly, and well -- or if not well, then as well as could be done, for sure.
mp_en_viaje: by the time the 80s roll around and everyone's driving and they kick the cattle out ass by ass to plonk down oil rigs, it's done for. the distances narrowed, and oil trade is integrating in ways cattle trading is not.
mp_en_viaje: 1960 texas is predicated on the remnants of three centuries' british struggles with the dutch encountering six centuries spanish struggles with the beasts of the land, women, horses, cattle generally, defeating it in the field and then having the intelligence to rape the carcass raw.
mp_en_viaje: trinque, i don't expect 1960s tx is reproducible outside of a hard reset. highly coherent, profoundly skilled workforce in a complete worldview will absolutely require the conditions that spawned them, and will necessarily dissolve once the solvents show up.
BingoBoingo: trinque: Maybe rural UY in the sense of the departments of Maldonado, Flores, or Rocha. I've not yet investigated out there yet.
trinque: was kinda curious if UY would end up being something like this. sounds instead like another latam communist-wannabe.
trinque: probably texas 40-50 years ago, in my case.
mp_en_viaje: to a certain degree it depends on one's particular interests. these are fine tuned for my needs
mp_en_viaje: budapest's okay-ish these days, otherwise...
trinque: mp_en_viaje: I'm curious, in all your travels, whether you've found another tolerable outpost.
mp_en_viaje: hanging out with alf rotted your brain, the same disorganised randomness exudes off you both by now.
mp_en_viaje: and otherwise, i'm not going to go through the rest of this drunken braying. start over, and start over like you know what the fuck you're doing.
mp_en_viaje: quote #trilema there. that's how authority flows.
mp_en_viaje: but in general : stop quothing shit from other chans into here. that's not how authority flows.
mp_en_viaje: i should kick you off of this case altogether, that's literally the dumbest possible move available to you.
ossabot: Logged on 2019-12-19 13:50:30 BingoBoingo: diana_coman: And per the agreement if he recovers coin the total damage is 40 BTC as he sends 10 BTC to asciilifeform. http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/asciilifeform/2019-12-18#1003953
mp_en_viaje: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/trilema/2019-12-19#1955803 << dude seriously, your notion of representation is you're going to quote some line from alf's channel as if that's now the channel of record ?
mp_en_viaje: a much simpler "x paid me to represent him in deed y via tx z" will go a lot further than tjhis other stuff you're doing, you know ?
mp_en_viaje: if a third party claims your client really paid you to subvert the republic rather than work with it, what do you have to say then ?
mp_en_viaje: if your client claims to not have "really" been your client later, what do you have to say then ?
ossabot: Logged on 2019-12-19 10:04:00 BingoBoingo: Per the agreement mike_c has made a payment to me for my voice in the forum with no provision for any refund to himself. He chose this demonstration after being offered the cheaper alternative of instead sweating out his ammends in the Qntra newsmines
mp_en_viaje: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/trilema/2019-12-19#1955792 << this is too vague as such. consider the two most obvious possible issues downstream : severance and subversion.
mp_en_viaje: s keep it simple instead. deed the basis of whatever claim it is you're representing and state the basis of your representation for the log ? something plain like "paid me so and so to represent this, here's the proof of payment"
ossabot: Logged on 2019-12-19 10:03:44 BingoBoingo: mp_en_viaje: Despite the long absence mike_c has made a substantial act of submission to the Republican power structure as gated by the Web of Trust. Over time, the bar for demonstrations of submission made by absentees that should have known better... I can only see it rising. Hence the screw turns clarification on the strategy last night
mp_en_viaje: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/trilema/2019-12-19#1955790 << dawg you're so weird! what's with all this bizzaro grandiloquence anyways.
feedbot: http://bingology.net/2019/conducting-a-job-search-in-2019-part-one-the-environment-inside-and-outside-the-republic/ << Bingology - BingoBoingo's Blog -- Conducting A Job Search In 2019: Part One - The Environment Inside And Outside The Republic
feedbot: http://trilema.com/2019/dur/ << Trilema -- Dur
mp_en_viaje: shall get to the logs and such presently.
feedbot: http://www.krankendenken.com/2019/12/paying-penance-for-walking-the-path-of-derealisation/ << Krankendenken -- Paying penance for walking the path of derealisation
lobbes: BingoBoingo: This makes sense on reflection, as it would seem like pegging things specifically to process is a dubious path to walk
BingoBoingo: lobbes: And less the process. It is about submission to the structure of authority.
BingoBoingo: lobbes: That is the core of the argument.
ericbot: Logged on 2019-12-19 17:50:35 BingoBoingo: Under my original proposal in the event mike_c's coin was not returned I would have refunded him 10 BTC reducing the damage to 25 BTC. Under this structure, mike_c is out 30 BTC minimum, outcome independent.
lobbes: fwiw I can see how it can be argued as submission, primarily because BingoBoingo's client has agreed to pay a fee regardless of the outcome.
lobbes: It does not look like there is any disagreement on 1. However the question of whether 2 is an actual demonstration of submission seems like it is still open.
lobbes: BingoBoingo: So if I'm understanding correctly, your argument rests on two things: 1) one must demonstrate submission to Republican processes (thus recognizing the sovereignty of tmsr) 2) your client has demonstrated submission with his acceptance to pay you 30 btc for voice
feedbot: http://qntra.net/2019/12/pantsuit-nancy-shows-cold-feet-after-pushing-through-impeachment-may-not-forward-impeachment-to-senate-for-trial/ << Qntra -- Pantsuit Nancy Shows Cold Feet After Pushing Through Impeachment May Not Forward Impeachment To Senate For Trial
BingoBoingo: Which outcome in this case leaves a borader path open for someone's pages to ask Hussein Bahamas eat a bowl of lumberjack shit in exchange for a literal coinflip that will determine whether or not the page escalates his plea for a small mercy to the page's lord?
BingoBoingo: Anyways, we've got this Republic which is sovereign. We've got a lord of lords in MP. Does not paying mike_c maximize coin that certainly stays inside TMSR, sure. Does not paying mike_c reduce the space in which Lords can credibly extract rents from those who've touched Pantsuit in the past, I very strongly suspect so. If we consider the cause of increasing the power of the Lordship over Pantsuit Delusonists...
BingoBoingo: mike_c agreed to pay substantially for representation along WoT lines. If he gets paid out and retreats forever back to Pantsuit dreamland or gets aggressive... he'll set a good precedent for closing the window that got him paid for all later comers.
diana_coman: so then I have no idea what it is.
ossabot: Logged on 2019-12-19 10:03:44 BingoBoingo: mp_en_viaje: Despite the long absence mike_c has made a substantial act of submission to the Republican power structure as gated by the Web of Trust. Over time, the bar for demonstrations of submission made by absentees that should have known better... I can only see it rising. Hence the screw turns clarification on the strategy last night
BingoBoingo: That's not the argument at all. The argument follows from http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/trilema/2019-12-19#1955790
diana_coman: might as well towards-purposing all along; that's not at all what "republic of men, not laws" means to me.
diana_coman: BingoBoingo: I really hope this case is not going to be argued on "perceived signals of decision A vs those of decision B".
BingoBoingo: This is a republic of men, not laws. The second order effects, benefits or hazards that follow a decision seem to be of incredible importance.
diana_coman: and moreover I don't think it's signalling that should be a concern really (in this case or in another).
BingoBoingo: diana_coman: If mike_c doesn't get paid it sends the signal that TMSR doesn't ever deal, following this external relations is difficult because of the "What the hell can a lord do for me" objection. If mike_c gets paid, TMSR matters, WoT matters, and voice has value as can be demonstrated through the outcome of the case... but the precedent is not sufficiently restrictive so as to prevent future tightening, refusals, etc.
diana_coman: anyway, I admit by now I'm quite curious as to what the others in L1 have to say.
diana_coman: ugh, I don't like much this precedent on precedent alone but maybe that's just me.
diana_coman: in the case where MPEx does not pay him out, I don't see how he has a say into what happens to the coin so I fail to see how is that part meaningful; if he wants the coin to be paid to asciilifeform entirely then he can do so once he gets it, no? if he doesn't get it, then he can't say what is to be done with it.
BingoBoingo: diana_coman: If someone comes on a day after mike_c is paid out by MPEx, I can't imagine this hypothetical next person would receive any offer for voice nearly as cheap as 30 BTC.
diana_coman: BingoBoingo: looking at it from the other side, do you mean to say that if someone comes tomorrow willing to pay 30 btc to have some issue heard in the forum (on which they also stand to possibly get more than the 30 btc as the most favourable result) then it follows that they submitted to tmsr?
BingoBoingo: The fact that he valued voice, whether MPEx pays him out or not... I don't see how that isn't submission. In his best case he gets coin out, maybe he does turn it all over to hostile parties. He agreed that in his worst case where MPEx does not pay him out... his coin stays with Republican interests.
BingoBoingo: mike_c gave us what Daphna Waxman didn't. Sure, Daphna Waxman is salt pork that happens to maybe still be on the hoof. If Daphna Waxman ever shows up... for mike_c's decision to make a deal... there is a screw to be turned.
diana_coman: ftr I do NOT mean that he shouldn't get the coin or anything of the sort; I literally mean what I say above namely that I don't see how does that qualify for submission.
diana_coman: that's where I find it hard to buy the "submission" thing, at the "get it to use it outside" bit.
diana_coman: BingoBoingo: as things stand, he is at any rate after getting the coin to use outside tmsr; because can't yet "find time" or whatever; sure, some price to pay for getting it out, that much his actions acknowledge + some appreciation for asciilifeform's work, certainly.
BingoBoingo: There is a sharp edge facing those who fall of the wrong side of the WoT map. It cleaves.
ossabot: Logged on 2019-12-17 05:00:55 mp_en_viaje: i get we're basically getting scammed by the duplicitous nature of the lazy, and will be, forever. cuz that's how the world goes, that's how laziness survives as a survival mechanism in the first place. but i'd much rather we understand each other on the topic, than it just proceed on my authority and then whatever, ten years later it'll be "mp just shouldn't have paid all these asshats" or who the fuck knows what
BingoBoingo: I really don't see how in this case mike_c could have demonstrated "non-aggression" alone. For his action, he actively acknowledged WoT supremacy. For his recognition of WoT supremacy, laziness has a demonstrable cost.
diana_coman: BingoBoingo: it's not about what I "want" to call it.
BingoBoingo: diana_coman: Note also what mike_c did not do. He did not go shopping around for a lower bidding lord after I gave him the strategy and then clarified the strategy, catching him up on where the Republic has advanced during his absence.
BingoBoingo: Maybe you don't want to call it submission, but it is an acknowledgement of the Republic as Sovereign.
BingoBoingo: Under my original proposal in the event mike_c's coin was not returned I would have refunded him 10 BTC reducing the damage to 25 BTC. Under this structure, mike_c is out 30 BTC minimum, outcome independent.
diana_coman will think of it some more.
diana_coman: hm; I think it shows non-agressiveness; whether submission, I don't quite see it.
BingoBoingo: diana_coman: Right. As asciilifeform is still politically alligned with the Republic, I find the proposal agreeable in creating a second opportunity to demonstrate continuing submission.
diana_coman: so basically he wants to give 10BTC to asciilifeform out of the coin he otherwise was even rather ready to consider lost anyway.
ossabot: (asciilifeform) 2019-12-18 mike_c: BingoBoingo: I changed my mind, and my offer to hire you: I send you fee of 30 BTC (same amount the mpex account cost coincidentally). If you lose the case and I don't recover my dividend, you send 10 BTC to ascii (nothing to me). If you win and I do recover, then I send 10 BTC to ascii (and you keep the 30). in case of partial recovery, i dunno, we do something gentlemanly.
BingoBoingo: diana_coman: And per the agreement if he recovers coin the total damage is 40 BTC as he sends 10 BTC to asciilifeform. http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/asciilifeform/2019-12-18#1003953
BingoBoingo: diana_coman: Well, certainly both options had dimensions in which they are cheaper than the other.
ossabot: Logged on 2019-12-19 10:04:00 BingoBoingo: Per the agreement mike_c has made a payment to me for my voice in the forum with no provision for any refund to himself. He chose this demonstration after being offered the cheaper alternative of instead sweating out his ammends in the Qntra newsmines
diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/trilema/2019-12-19#1955792 - how do you reason to get to the conclusion that the qntra contribution is cheaper alternative? The way I see it, the choice clearly spells that mike_c considers the 30 btc as the cheaper option compared to putting in the effort& time on qntra for the interval you requested.
BingoBoingo: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/trilema/2019-12-19#1955771 << Great letter indeed. Kinda why it got the treatment and not the hallucinatory shit except as presented by the letter.
BingoBoingo: Other lords, you are welcome to begin spinning the blades
BingoBoingo: After being brought up to speed on relevant matters the Republic has explored in his extended absence, mike_c countered my proposal with one that sees him out an extra 5 BTC over my initial proposed structure whether he recovers his coin or not.
BingoBoingo: The problem of the Republic and the Negrated is not "What does the Republic owe the negrated", the problem is... are those negrated for their absence capable of submission after returning. Is doing something other than submitting an option they hallucinate.
BingoBoingo: It didn't take many lines of conversation or a whole hour for mike_c to find that the after missing out on things over the years like the entire history of an ISP... An actual demonstration of the value of WoT position and the barriers presented by WoT gating was his best possible demonstration of submission.
BingoBoingo: In the general case I see a -1 or -2 negrating as a sort of "caution", but I find it hard to read a -10 as anything other than the recipient being marked as future salt-pork that happens to maybe be on the hoof at the time of rating.
BingoBoingo: Per the agreement mike_c has made a payment to me for my voice in the forum with no provision for any refund to himself. He chose this demonstration after being offered the cheaper alternative of instead sweating out his ammends in the Qntra newsmines
ossabot: Logged on 2019-12-19 00:23:14 BingoBoingo: mp_en_viaje: The truth doesn't wear out. The screw however turns with time.
BingoBoingo: mp_en_viaje: Despite the long absence mike_c has made a substantial act of submission to the Republican power structure as gated by the Web of Trust. Over time, the bar for demonstrations of submission made by absentees that should have known better... I can only see it rising. Hence the screw turns clarification on the strategy last night
deedbot: BingoBoingo updated rating of mike_c from -1 to 2 << After a long absence came to swift submission to Republican WoT power structure at a greater cost to self than initially proposed
BingoBoingo: !!rate mike_c 2 After a long absence came to swift submission to Republican WoT power structure at a greater cost to self than initially proposed
ossabot: Logged on 2019-12-18 19:26:33 mp_en_viaje: so the answer will probably have to carve itself a space within these two wires. now, how exactly, is what we're talking about.
diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/trilema/2019-12-18#1955640 - the only possible way I can see is exactly as it seems to be set to go aka negrated may find someone to speak for them and based on the arguments presented a decision will be made; not sure what more can be directly said/specified upfront and in general.
ossabot: Logged on 2019-12-18 19:16:09 mp_en_viaje: getting back to the whole "among they themselves" : the classical form of the sq in extremis was something along the lines of consules darent operam ne quid detrimenti res publica caperet ; videant consules ne res publica detrimenti capiat. let those guys in charge of things make sure the public shit dun get burned. there's gotta be some commonality for a republic to exist in the first place.
diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/trilema/2019-12-18#1955628 - this makes full sense, thank you.
mp_en_viaje: goes quite well after a lazy breakfast consisting of a sampler of halva we bought in this little shop in the edirne bazaar (which is pretty fucking cool btw), assorted dried fruits, ayran, tahin, chestnuts an' whatnot. i'm very roundly sated and just as thoroughly satisfied.
mp_en_viaje: no bible in the drawers tho.
mp_en_viaje: they even thoughtfully provide matches, in case you're out. old style, hotel branded boxes, like it were nyc 1969 all over again.
mp_en_viaje: amusingly, place does have a fire alarm. apparently this is not a concern.
mp_en_viaje: in other minutuous mindblowia updates, im lying on my bed here IN THE HOTEL ROOM, pile of assorted cigarillos and respectable ashtray to the side, fucking SMOKING.
mp_en_viaje: http://fixpoint.welshcomputing.com/2019/review-of-polarbeard_add_sendrawtransaction_rpcvpatch/ << but anyways, cuteness, jfw discovering the horrors of satoshi bitcoin. most of the insanity you discover in the guy's patch is just carried over.
mp_en_viaje: i mean uh. the word's the same, ye olde beran, but the participle / past tense of it is "borne" in all cases when you're not talking of actual birth.
mp_en_viaje: jfw, " or at any rate that the costs of such a change be born by he who makes it" << be borne. diff word, to bear, entirely unrelated to birth.
ossabot: Logged on 2019-12-19 00:23:27 BingoBoingo: There is a tentative agreement.