339600+ entries in 0.213s
BingoBoingo: Get
them hooked, pull
the rug out from under
them, see which ones swim.
ascii_butugychag: no. but i was curious what felipelalli was
thinking when he produced
this.
BingoBoingo: felipelalli: What you should do for great lolz is depreciate
the windows version.
felipelalli: ascii_butugychag, I didn't ask you
to use it, didn't I?
felipelalli: ascii_butugychag, yes. my first idea was make
this 100% web, but
the IRC let me crazy. So I had just
two dawns
to implement it, I choose
the cheapest for my good will and
the win version is because
they demanded it
felipelalli: jurov,
they are learning
the importance of
the
thing, at least, I hope.
They are learning
the importance
to make solid contracts and verify
the people reputation.
BingoBoingo: <ascii_butugychag> when do we get 'reactor controlz for
the lazy' << In Japan.
Turns out Fukushima was running off of one of
those dollar store Sharp organizers.
PeterL: Do
they not have real computers in Brazil?
danielpbarron: let me see if i can make one of
those funny metaphores out of
this: "that's like a cock
that can get you pregnant, but you can't have sex with it"
☟︎ felipelalli: jurov, I understand. But it is being very useful so far in Brazilian community. Actually
the app can sign messages (not verify it yet)
jurov: felipelalli: i can see, but...user
that doesn't know how
to make a signature or
talk
to gribble don't have anything
to do in otc
shinohai saw
that .jar file, clicked off.
trinque: for some reason my concoction of pybitcointools and btcd stopped making valid
transactions
felipelalli: trinque,
the start of
the problem was my expired key, wasn't it?
felipelalli: jurov, it is
the Bitcoin OTC WoT for
the lazy
mod6: kewl. i seem
to recall having
to do a -rescan afterward but i could be wrong
trinque: going
to poke it more in a bit
trinque: jurov: nah, deedbot is still jammed until I get
trb
to send
the next bundle
trinque: speaking of which,
thanks
to
the helping hand of
the other republic nodes, deedbot.org is a fully synced
trb public node
mod6: oh
thought you meant #b-a
mod6: i read
trb logs every day. who doesn't?
danielpbarron: although honestly
the Eulora log is way more interesting
assbot: Logged on 03-02-2016 17:01:22; ascii_butugychag: does nobody but me actually watch
their
trb logs ?
ascii_butugychag: aha
this was
the first major 'pgp is broken beyond repair'
thread, iirc.
jurov: it can't be used
to identify signed document
jurov: phf
this was
tried several
times but since
the hash in
the signature is done with a date and whatnot,
phf: i was
trying
to see if could look up
the corresponding vpatch by decoding
the sig's hash, and
then assoc into a precomputed map of vpatch hashes. unfortunately openpgp concats
the sig header
to
the payload, so can't precompute :/
phf: perhaps something
that v should filter by
phf: so
there's
two sig's
that are not sha512. genesis.vpatch.trinque.sig is sha256 and polarbeard_add_getpeerinfo_rpc.vpatch.polarbeard.sig is sha1
☟︎ PeterL: ascii_butugychag> as
that would require
the hash of (-b) and (c')
to be equal << is it looking at
the hash of
the pressed value, which should be
the same, or
the hash of
the patches
themselves, which I understand are quite different?
ascii_butugychag: 'To understand commutation, you should understand why we cannot keep our original patches, but are forced
to rely on evil step sisters instead.' << seems like
they solved it in
the PRECISELY most-anti-vtronic way.
PeterL: wouldn't
they be equal?
punkman: ascii_butugychag: right, I guess good
time
to remind people
PeterL: so in my example, if you add a patch d, it could equally be added
to (-b) or (c') ?
ascii_butugychag: and it is
trivially possible
to unwind
to arbitrary point without creating a cycle
punkman: don't we have
to be careful with
the antipatches
though, so as not
to introduce cycles in
the graph?
PeterL: why not just regrind all
the patches off
the genesis and act like we fixed it in one blow?
ascii_butugychag: they smack of pious fraud, 'this was always perfect, born of
the gods'
☟︎ ascii_butugychag: and i officially consider regrinds a
thing
to be avoided if at all physically possible
☟︎ punkman: darcs also has "inverse patches" in
their "theory"
PeterL: is
the antimatter patch
the correct way
to do it?
mod6: then if all is good, i'll roll up another publication of
the whole
thing & call it v99995
PeterL: if you have patches a->b->c and you decide
to get rid of b, you should end up with a->b->c->(-b), not with a->c' (where c' is reground c without b patch) , do I understand correct?
☟︎ mod6: I'll probably just send
the patch
to
the ML
to recruit people
to help me
test over
the next
two weeks.
mod6: in other news, ive got a patch for V
that's not only
the fix for
the post-press hash checking, but also for
the problem when running
the graphing
tool with a node
that has no decendants. and a couple of small cleanup
things.
ascii_butugychag: i mean hey, it's ~my~ history of bug-crapping
that is being whitewashed over, so i shouldn't complain... but still
mod6: i dunno either now,
that was a giant pain in
the ass.
ascii_butugychag is still not sure why it was necessary
to discard
the history and compress
the old patch + its fix into a new one
ascii_butugychag: this means
that
the new patches have
the same effect as
the old.
mod6: are
they not identical?
ascii_butugychag: what i am expecting
to see in a correct press is for
the
trees
to be IDENTICAL
ascii_butugychag: phf: not so much unpressable, but
that ~you~ lost
the ancestors
mod6: i guess
that makes sense you wanted
to see it
that way - i
thought
the first way just because
that way
there ~is~ a diff
to look at. but maybe
this is better.
phf: fwiw deleting a patch doesn't "remove it" as such, but ensures
that all descendants are unpressable
ascii_butugychag: your local one consists of all of
the ones you downloaded for which you have
the signatures you accept as valid
ascii_butugychag: but
the global, imaginary
tree contains all vpatches ever authored
ascii_butugychag: every patch ever written ~is in
the
tree~ as it appears
to archaeologists
polarbeard: I completely see unique names are a must, but if you don't replace you'll keep mistakes in
the
tree?
ascii_butugychag: mod6, ben_vulpes, mircea_popescu, et al can produce curated
trees simply by signing.
ascii_butugychag: ~patch submitter~ has
the responsibility of coming up with a unique name.
ascii_butugychag: demanding
that world move and rearrange itself because somebody wants
to reuse a name, is lunacy.
☟︎ jurov: i am sooooo in favot of adding another hurdle
to
turdatron!!!
ascii_butugychag: jurov: how about we have
the simple and sane solution - a name can be used once.
polarbeard: and
that would not require renaming past patches actually
jurov: actually no, people will rename
them manually,
the curation as you intended all along