38400+ entries in 0.021s
BingoBoingo: driven by how easy it is for
them
to collect heights and other metrics at scale.
BingoBoingo: <mp_en_viaje>
the driver of
the error is
the desire of having a ~unique~ personality. it is not deemed sufficient, by contemporary man,
to merely have
the same personality as
the entire
tableau of orthodox saints.
there's
too many of
those, see. gotta be unique. as it can't be unique and meaningful at
te same
time (think, can it ?)... all
that's left is
the getting-drunk-on-tapwater "secret parameters". << On
the USG side also likely
mp_en_viaje: or w/e, fingerprints, whole list of
these. bootshining.
mp_en_viaje: feel free
to resuscitate it by giving me example of notion of personality
that's not homomorphism of height.
mp_en_viaje: only in
that
they are what
the contemporaneous man believe it
to be. but yes, we shall continue later.
Mocky: I've got
to step out for a bit now
Mocky: I see what you mean by
the driver of
the error, but I don't see how height, numeric value etc. have
to do with personality.
mp_en_viaje: the driver of
the error is
the desire of having a ~unique~ personality. it is not deemed sufficient, by contemporary man,
to merely have
the same personality as
the entire
tableau of orthodox saints.
there's
too many of
those, see. gotta be unique. as it can't be unique and meaningful at
te same
time (think, can it ?)... all
that's left is
the getting-drunk-on-tapwater "secret parameters".
☟︎ mp_en_viaje: whereas "those
things no one could know" are in fact so much wind chasing, because... well duh, ~of course
they could~. self-evidently
they could, how
the fuck not.
mp_en_viaje: yet "those
things anyone could do" are
the only possible meaningful personality, specifically in
that most ... do not fucking do
them.
mp_en_viaje: act
that little story i described (because "anyone could have done
that") but rather
the incidental ~exact number~ representin my height, or
the ~exact numeric value~ of what i said in private sometime, or (as per anglo-bank logic)
the string
that's my mother's maiden name
mp_en_viaje: there is a ~reason~
that google's (and, by proxy, senior brin's son's son's) genius notion of "intelligence" is ~VERY LARGE~ (if sparse) matrix of values while usg.polizeistaat's notion of "knowledge" is... ~very large~ (if sparse) matris of values (describing eg phone metadata) WHILE AT
THE SAME
TIME all
the people involved, in either of
those, and all
the people
the yever know or will know, firmly believe
that ~my
true personality~ is not in f
mp_en_viaje: i said i don't
think so, and held
them out for his inspection. he
thanked me for my kindnss, i explained it's not so much kindness as duty, and we parted amicably.
mp_en_viaje: so
today, i
took elevator in neue rathaus (it's a
thing in munchen, irrelevant specifically).
this involved paying a fee.
the man i paid it
to made change from 52 for 12 by handing me a 20 euro and a 100 euro bill.
mp_en_viaje: that'll pass. now, i propose
to you
that
this is a parameter in
the first place, in
that it consists of a matter of degrees, however combined. it's entirely quantitative,
there's no qualitative portion
to it. and it is secret, because her belief is
that another wouldn't know which valus
the parameter
takes, nothing else.
mp_en_viaje: this is admirably circular. but let's let it lay as it fell for now, and instead look from
the other end : give me an example of something some chick would regard as permitting you
to distinguish her from any other.
Mocky: well
there's an entity or process
that exists
that can be parameterized, and so some attribute or input
that process
Mocky: ok, a
tx characteristic upon which a miner decides not
to mine said
tx
mp_en_viaje: i say it can't exist, you wish
to see why not. i'm allowed
to ask for it no ?
Mocky: well example of something
that can't exist?
mp_en_viaje: Mocky, let's work it
this way : give me an example of secret parameter.
Mocky: but how do
the secret parameters apply
to personal identity?
mp_en_viaje: ie, just did above what flaubert died
trying : produced exhaustive catalog of contemporary stupidity. go me!
mp_en_viaje: the "secret mempool",
the "claiming saddam has
things he doesn't will forward our goals", it's an endless list. remarkably enough, it's a COMPLETE list of contemporary
thought.
mp_en_viaje: there can't be, you see, such a
thing as a secret parameter. and
this applies equally well
to
the "bombing stationary object" problem
touched above, and
to
the "i will make website ban so and so after so and so" anti-mp historical fetlifish computer "engineering", and
to
the romcom notion of "deeply personal experience" and so following.
mp_en_viaje: my point was
that
the contemporary notion of personal identity is actually predicated on a supposed set of secret parameters, something much akin
to having it predicated on spherical cubes, or alf's 2's
that are also somtimes 1s.
Mocky: mp_en_viaje: programmers notional personal identity seems
to sum
to pissing code into github
mp_en_viaje: asciilifeform, isn't
that quite
the mental image btw ? a plutonium lake.
mp_en_viaje: difference between "engine
that could work if built, but can't be built until liquid plutonium available by
the pondful" and "engine
that is based on
thermodynamic non-cycle".
a111: Logged on 2018-06-19 16:35 asciilifeform: 'erryone hates it, all
the lifts smell of piss. oh btw, where is
the lift here, i gotta go'
mp_en_viaje: here we are in 2000, still with
the exact same problem, just as unsolved.
mp_en_viaje: this, incidentally, is EXACTLY what patents and copyrights were supposed
to solve, and were sold on
the promise of solving :
the moron 1700s "engineer" dropping his "signature secret sauce" in processes. so as
to
thereby exist.
mp_en_viaje: if you examine
the matter with
the
tools of
the psychologist, you might discover contemporary notion of ~personal identity~ in anglo world actually consists of little else.
mp_en_viaje: and i suspect
they all rest on fundamental goanga whereby "but muh sikrit parameters"
mp_en_viaje: (the fundamental difference between dumb cunt and dumb dicklet is
that former wants "things
to be good for everyone" whereas latter wants "her
to have
to")
a111: Logged on 2014-09-27 03:19 asciilifeform: 'You have
to do basic science on your libraries
to see how
they work,
trying out different inputs and seeing how
the code reacts.'
mp_en_viaje: asciilifeform, could well be. unlike
the programmers,
the incamother worshippers ~mean well~.
mp_en_viaje: it is problem of chthonic culture, so yes it just re-infects itself.
the disease of contemporaneity expellas furcam etc.
mp_en_viaje: or
to women in
theworkplace, or
to earth science, or
to "futurism", or
to wikipedia, or
to etcetera.
a111: Logged on 2019-03-12 22:09 asciilifeform: i
think aristotle actually had , sadly, correct notion, where doing some kinds of work actually makes you dumber
mp_en_viaje: not merely un, but outright anti. firmly believes by necessary implication
that science is not actually possible in any practical sense.
mp_en_viaje: this goes quite deep in its import :
the outlook of contemporary man is actually very deeply ANTIscientific.
mp_en_viaje: ask any dood you feel like, see if he believes
that "secret parameters" are a
thing or not.
mp_en_viaje: "impossible
to guess" set, becayhse guess what,
through repetition and measurement ANY parameter comes out.
mp_en_viaje: but yes. lotta what is protocol is promise. starting with "segwit" bs, i won't unearth
the
threads.
mp_en_viaje: (i guess
they don't use
the same convention in us f, analysis)
mp_en_viaje: though
the problem with C is
that it dun survive derivation well,
mp_en_viaje: and you know, corp with
three shareholders still corp anyway. and so on.
mp_en_viaje: there is
tension in
this question -- inasmuch as declaring your computer
TWO computers arbitrarily, and
then discussing
the safety of
the
talk over
this imaginary boundry is a purely abstract exerise.
mp_en_viaje: obv works on yokels, but ultimately extracting ~all
tx of which any node ever
talked
t o another node is
trivial.
mp_en_viaje: it is very difficult
to maintain mempool secrets from well conencted nodes.
a111: Logged on 2019-04-03 20:11 mp_en_viaje:
http://btcbase.org/log/2019-04-03#1906628 <<
think : if
this worked you;d know because conflicting
tx would be 9000% of
the mempool, because chinese fatty dun need you for anything, casn produce conflicts by his self.
a111: Logged on 2019-04-03 20:20 mp_en_viaje:
http://btcbase.org/log/2019-04-03#1906640 <<
there is almost no case where mining n
tx is better
than mining n+1. some miners do multi-hashing, where
they mine different blocks (generally, off-by-one
tx blocks) on varios chunks of
their farms (mostly because of naive chinese-like notions re chance), but
this is not
that.
a111: Logged on 2019-04-03 17:39 asciilifeform: i'd be quite curious
to hear what
trinque says about all of
this; i expect
today he does
the most on-chain work of anyone here
a111: Logged on 2019-04-03 17:13 asciilifeform:
http://btcbase.org/log/2019-04-03#1906628 <<
to expand on
this: say you issued
tx1 where input i and output o1. he sees it, it goes
to back of queue, as uninteresting, he does not mine it himself, but does relay
to competitors. but if you also issue a and
tx2, where input i and output o2, o2 != o1 , ~then~
tx2 goes
to front of his queue, as by mining it he can
throw caltrop
to
the competing miners , invalidating
their chain
mp_en_viaje:
http://btcbase.org/log/2019-04-03#1906640 <<
there is almost no case where mining n
tx is better
than mining n+1. some miners do multi-hashing, where
they mine different blocks (generally, off-by-one
tx blocks) on varios chunks of
their farms (mostly because of naive chinese-like notions re chance), but
this is not
that.
☝︎☟︎ a111: Logged on 2019-04-03 14:58 asciilifeform: so far
the closest
thing i have
to a hypothesis, is
that
the fattest chinese want you
to issue a set of conflicting
tx so
the
thinner ones end up with longer invalidated chains
a111: Logged on 2019-04-03 14:54 asciilifeform:
http://btcbase.org/log/2019-04-03#1906616 <<
this is a well-known effect ( most famously, possibly involved in how 'bitbet' burned down ) and i've personally observed it erry single
time i sent coin in past coupla yrs .
tx dun move until you send a conflicting
tx . why
the miners do
this -- i still do not know